Slashdot Mirror
Secretaries Sacked After Flamewar at Work
ross.w writes "Two legal secretaries in Sydney have been sacked after a flamewar over a ham sandwich got circulated throughout the cities financial district. The insults about figures, boyfriends and jobs flew thick and fast and ultimately resulted in the dismissal of both of them for mis-use of the email system."
Here is a link with pics. http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,2028 1,16525356-5001022,00.html
I agree, this is pretty stupid. The whole exchange of emails is here:
a _lawye.html
http://radar.smh.com.au/archives/2005/09/cutting_
They probably say that email is not to be used for non-work related purposes (Every place Ive worked at has had that one) but as a law firm, I'd imagine they'd need a strict policy about internal correspondance leaving the firms internal network.
Even such a clause can be hard to enforce legally if the defence can show that it is not enforced uniformly. That is the danger of broad contract clause. If the defence can show that EVERYBODY violates the contract, then the courts will question the wisdom of enforcing it in any particular case.
For example, if the windows EULA contained a restriction that said that if you mow your own lawn you agree to give Bill Gates the title to your home, that is technically an agreement to avoid a particular activity. If MS then slectively went after windows copyright violators using this clause it would be likely to be found unenforceable, since it is being used selectively.
The fact is that most companies do in fact tolerate personal use of email despite wording to the contrary in the AUP. If the defence can show that many others send personal emails, and that their managers are aware of this activity, then the court may be likely to question why they are being singled out. Otherwise a company who wants to get rid of all its over-40 employees could just do an audit and fire just these employees for sending personal emails.
Many companies as a result have AUPs that specifically allow personal use of email within certain bounds. A court is more likely to uphold such an AUP if the bounds sound reasonable and has in fact been violated (such as running a personal business on company time, or sending bulk mail or many large emails, or excessive use of company time). Additionally, if an employee is excessively using time at work for personal business it is likely that their performance will suffer and that is clearly cause for termination.