Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wlfgng on January 09, 2003, 09:18:57 AM
-
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_1661216,00.html
yeah, this elected official was intelligent
-
LOL, wow....too funny
Never do your fun stuff on company property :D
-
He is an elected official that gets horny for his girlfriend...OMG...hang, draw and quarter that man.:eek:
-
he's married and doing it on company time.
The premise of firing him is that he was so consumed with this email (to his secretary) that he didn't get his job done..
his work that is...
it also illustrates a point: Work email is public property...
-
I would suspect that this is the real motivation for the investigation rather than any sort of sexual harrasment claim:
"Records show that Baker boosted Sale's salary by $41,000 in less than three years, and also gave her overtime and bonuses."
I suspect Whitley was more annoyed by the money than by any lewd remarks that he could've made, but she knew a charge of sexual harrasment carried a greater powder charge and would get action quicker. Nothing draws an employee's ire more than unfair advantages being used by another employee to boost position and wealth the office.
Both Sale and Baker had it coming.
-
<----- scrambles to delete all e-mails.:D
-
lol
-
is this a free country? Then why isn't your email private anymore? :confused:
-
because you don't OWN the machine, service, network, etc at work.
You're using theirs.
-
One thing.. Your doing it on Company time..and company property.
Some companys even know what website you visited and what time!
Thankfully, I don't have to be concerned I'm one of the owners..:D
-
Are you kidding me?
A judge ruled that these messages are public property? Is he INSANE? I mean, we in Sweden have pretty much the most liberal freedom of information laws there is (scientology bible is a good example of that).
But there is no way something like that would be pulled from an employees email account and made avaliable to the public.
un F*CKING believable...
That judge should have his head examined. Or better yet, someone should take a look at his temp internet files folder...
-
actually, it goes beyond the usual "company" email vs "personal" email in this case. He's an elected official. Any communications he issues using his official channels (phones, email) are public property according to Colorado law. It's the same here in Florida as well, our elected officials in the school system I work in, that is the Superintendent and School Board members, are under the same umbrella. The school board members chose NOT to have official email accounts for this very reason. The superintendent needs it, so every message he sends is CC'ed to a special archive (makes it easier on him and the email admins if they ever need to recover an email of his.)
One of our county officers here got in trouble for something he said in an email. If memory serves me correct, it was a racial comment. I can't remember if he resigned or was just reprimanded though.
-
I think it's great.
it's abuse of public time, money and equipment.
now if he owned his own computer, paid for his own ISP, and wasn't getting paid to screw around ....it'd be different.
-
Well, over here we draw a big 'ol black line between "work related" and "not work related". If you work for the government (like I do) anything work related in my temp internet file, my email account, my HD is public property. Any Joe off the street can demand to see what my mail account looks like for example.
BUT before Joe off the street gets to see the printouts of all my emails, a lawyer-type judge goes over each and every one to see what is work related and what is not. Then he shreds the personal ones, and give Joe the work-ones.
-
hortlund, so it's just a difference between your law and our law. Don't blame the judge for interpreting our law correctly, blame the legislatures that made all public officials' emails public property. ;)
-
I send myself hundreds of lewd emails (sometimes with diagrams) every day....as of yet, my company has refused to do anything about it
-
it SHOULD be public property.. it's paid for by the public
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
it also illustrates a point: Work email is public property...
Uh oh...
-
hmm...if you want to do that toejam do it at home (or in a liscenced brothel)
-
It's not public property, I believe it's the property and responsibility of the company that it came from.
With ownership comes liability, when you are at work you represent that company or firm to the public. Even if the contents of your email is private, you are using your company email address owned by the company representing the company to send it ON company time.
Now if someone gets harrassing email from someone's company email address, I'm certain not only the person doing it but the company it came from can be found liable.
That's why it's not private, Liability and Ownership.
This is far from being "public" though.
Otherwise all interoffice memo's would be availible to the public for viewing and there would be some serious security issues discussing anything via email.
But, I have to wonder if this was done on the basis that he's an 'elected official' I'd like to any of George Bush's email that was written to his family on our time...gonna happen? I doubt it.
Originally posted by Wlfgng
it also illustrates a point: Work email is public property...
-
Kanth - He works for a government agency. All of the property of that government agency, including the emails, IS public property. That's why the media was allowed access to it.
SOB
-
I work for the government.
Work email is public property in the sense that the public IS allowed access to it under certain circumstances.
case in point, when the public wanted to know what our commisioners were doing they were allowed to view their emails.
obviously a grey area but working for the gov't means your working on public time, money, etc
-
In Florida its called "Sunshine Laws".
-
so...what's the point of having a password on your email account?
-
Where does sexual harassment of Whitley come in? The article never mentioned how she got involved.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Where does sexual harassment of Whitley come in? The article never mentioned how she got involved.
miko
My guess is she was trying to prove 'hostile environment' sexual harassment.
Many governemtn agencies and large companies these days will force you to sign a 'non-confidentiality' agreement for company e-mail as a condition of continued employment.
-
Montezuma: My guess is she was trying to prove 'hostile environment' sexual harassment.
It's hard to see how proving a man being romantic towards his steady girlfriend may substantiate accusations of him doing uninvited/unwelcomed sexual mover towards anyone else.
Of course if she says he harassed her and he claimes to be impotent or homosexual or never cheating on his wife, that would be good evidence.
This guy clearly got carried away - what, did he think his IT department would keep information confidential like Secret Service did?
miko
-
I had a situation like this in the previous company I worked at. We had an employee (female) who was 'liaising' with a vendor rep/guy that visited us (she also had a boyfriend at the time).
Anyway, I became 'aware' of certain emails by means that I cannot reveal. And after a while these two got caught snogging in the back of our warehouse - and rumours raged.
So, one day our manager decides he wants to see one of these emails. So, as this employee went to launch he raced to her PC before the screensaver (with password) kicked in, found an offending email and printed it, then raced back to the printer.
And waited...
And waited...
And waited...
I looked over at him and said "you didn't print to the default printer did you?". His face dropped. You see, our default printer was in our main branch 1000km's away, in the warehouse, so we could print new orders directly to the warehouse crew.
So said manager dashes to the phone rings up the other warehouse, says "theres a very private confidential email printing out, whatever you do don't read it tear it up immediately".
I'm standing there pissing my pants saying "ohhh they're gonna read it for sure now".
Anyway, this email put Penthouse Forum to shame, and of course the crappy dot matrix printout did the company rounds :D
-
I think the 'she' in this case was a willing participant....
at least that's the local rumor
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
because you don't OWN the machine, service, network, etc at work.
You're using theirs.
So if he woud do it old fashion way by using pen, paper and envelope taken from his office the company could still rip those letters open and see whats inside?
Guess they can also listen their employers phonecalls too.
Here you get sentenced if you do that, guess people have more rights for their privacy here :)
-
put it this way:
if you were the boss (your money, company, equip, etc)
would you be happy paying someone to do this on YOUR equipment and on YOUR time ?
-
Nope but that doesn't give me any rights to open my workers emails, letters or listen his calls.
I could, of course, turn to the police and ask court order to check his/hers emails if there's a chance that person is transferring company secrets or otherwise trying to dig the ground under the company.
I don't think personal emails fit in that category.
-
btw Wlfgng have you ever used other computers than your own to surf in the net, maybe in this very same UBB HTC is hosting?
-
SOB look at my quote.
I was being very specific.
basically saying, Private enterprise has private email.
I only address the 'elected public official' part at the bottom.
Originally posted by SOB
Kanth - He works for a government agency. All of the property of that government agency, including the emails, IS public property. That's why the media was allowed access to it.
SOB
in other words, I understand that, I was pointing out a very particular statement that made it sound as if all email is public.
-
What makes you think all email isn't public :)
Email is the equivilent of mailing letters without envelopes!
Originally posted by Kanth
in other words, I understand that, I was pointing out a very particular statement that made it sound as if all email is public.
-
closed systems and encryption makes me think so. :)
Originally posted by Vulcan
What makes you think all email isn't public :)
Email is the equivilent of mailing letters without envelopes!
-
Closed systems? eheheheheheheheh.
And PGP got broken recently didn't it?
Originally posted by Kanth
closed systems and encryption makes me think so. :)
-
Yep, closed systems.
I dunno about pgp being broken can you link me?
Also in this thread we are talking about lawfully public and not theftably public. But I understand you are going off on purpose to make a point about security in general.
:)
Originally posted by Vulcan
Closed systems? eheheheheheheheh.
And PGP got broken recently didn't it?
-
In my state it is illegal to use the equipment for private use (AFAIK). Don't be angry with the judge, if it comes before him, he has to act according to the law.
-
Hortlund, I don't see why you are so incensed. It's public property and he's on public time. Same with companies. The company owns the computer and pays for the Internet access...it's theirs! The employee just gets to use it but has no ownership of the material.
Come over to my house and use my computer to send out personal items and try to tell me I can't make it public.
-
The gist I'm getting from the Euros is that they think employers should fire / disipline their employees based on their productivity, not by snooping and eavesdropping.
If an employee is screwing around on company time it will show up in his/her productivity, or lack thereof as the case may be. If they can turn in the required/expected productivity while screwing around a little bit, who is it hurting? Obviously they stand a better chance of promotion/raises if they used the time they are screwing around in to be even more productive and beat their employer's expectations, but as long as they meet expectations why care.
In my personal experience a distrustful employer hurts employee loyalty and morale, regardless of whether they are loafers.
In the USA we very heavily weight all these kinds of things towards the employer's best interest, in Europe (generally speaking) it sounds like they are either more balanced or weight things towards the employee's benefit.
-
Originally posted by Puke
Hortlund, I don't see why you are so incensed. It's public property and he's on public time. Same with companies. The company owns the computer and pays for the Internet access...it's theirs! The employee just gets to use it but has no ownership of the material.
Come over to my house and use my computer to send out personal items and try to tell me I can't make it public.
I honestly do not understand this point of view.
If I use a piece of paper and a pen from work, and write a private letter, using the company pen and paper, does that make the letter the property of the company? OF COURCE NOT. Not even if I take an envelope and a stamp too from the company and mail it by giving it to the company mailman.
Same thing with your house and your computer. Are you honestly saying that if I borrow pen and paper from you to write a letter (or a novel), that letter or novel becomes your property? I DONT THINK SO.
What complicates things for you americans are the contracts signed when you become an employee, but the basic principle is very simple.
Geez what happened to the "land of the free",and the "rights of the individual."
Hello 1984.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I honestly do not understand this point of view.
If I use a piece of paper and a pen from work, and write a private letter, using the company pen and paper, does that make the letter the property of the company? OF COURCE NOT. Not even if I take an envelope and a stamp too from the company and mail it by giving it to the company mailman.
Same thing with your house and your computer. Are you honestly saying that if I borrow pen and paper from you to write a letter (or a novel), that letter or novel becomes your property? I DONT THINK SO.
What complicates things for you americans are the contracts signed when you become an employee, but the basic principle is very simple.
Geez what happened to the "land of the free",and the "rights of the individual."
Hello 1984.
Hortland,
In the United States it would mean those things. Companies regularly have new hires sign agreements that state anything the employee thinks of or creates (new software algorithims, new products, new business proccesses, ect) while at work are all the property of the company.
For example, if an employee has a side business and during the work day they have a sudden brainstorm regarding their side business, those ideas belong to the company.
Using the company's equipment, even mere office supplies, for personal business is theft.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I honestly do not understand this point of view.
If I use a piece of paper and a pen from work, and write a private letter, using the company pen and paper, does that make the letter the property of the company? OF COURCE NOT. Not even if I take an envelope and a stamp too from the company and mail it by giving it to the company mailman.
Same thing with your house and your computer. Are you honestly saying that if I borrow pen and paper from you to write a letter (or a novel), that letter or novel becomes your property? I DONT THINK SO.
What complicates things for you americans are the contracts signed when you become an employee, but the basic principle is very simple.
Geez what happened to the "land of the free",and the "rights of the individual."
Hello 1984.
If you are an elected official and you send something on official letterhead, you've just represented yourself as an elected official and that document is public property as a result. The things written on that document can be held against you, and it can be used in a trial.
It has nothing to do with 1984.
BTW, most of this stuff comes around as a result of something else. Work is suffering so the "why?" questions start. People don't really dig until after someone has been suspended. People are usually fired for porn after someone sees they are looking for it, then it is found on their computer. Someone is usually fired for "e-mails" because someone else shows them around... then the rest of them are found.
Obviously, the gentleman had been writing the e-mails for some time... it wasn't until there was a problem that they were discovered.
AKDejaVu
-
Hort.. would you, as an employer, pay your employees to do this kind of thing at work instead of getting their jobs done?
And you'd be happy about it?
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
Hort.. would you, as an employer, pay your employees to do this kind of thing at work instead of getting their jobs done?
And you'd be happy about it?
Dude, are you seriously living under the impression that all employees spend 100% of their time at work doing nothing but work related stuff?
Take a look at the activity on this forum on weekdays and on weekends...notice any trend?
Personally I would not mind, as long as they did what I hired them to do. I wouldnt have any problems with my employees mailing or surfing the net during their off time at work, as long as they get the job done each and every day.
-
i think the dude in the artocle should run for US PRESIDENT against GB hehe it worked for Clinton
-
I agree hort..
Personally I would not mind, as long as they did what I hired them to do.
but in this case the number and frequency of emails proved that they were so consumed with this that they didn't do what they were hired to do.
It wasn't that the 'act' was so uncommon in of itself, it was just too much, too often, for too long. hours a day spent doing this.
Obviously it is within the normal realm of activity to spend some time on personal stuff but this was way over the line.
Most companies (ours for example) state that you need to LIMIT personal phone calls, emails, etc..
because you're paid to work, not 'play'.
during their off time at work
exactly.. this was during their ON time at work
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Dude, are you seriously living under the impression that all employees spend 100% of their time at work doing nothing but work related stuff?
Take a look at the activity on this forum on weekdays and on weekends...notice any trend?
Personally I would not mind, as long as they did what I hired them to do. I wouldnt have any problems with my employees mailing or surfing the net during their off time at work, as long as they get the job done each and every day.
That's correct, Hort, but the worker at work MUST use all time to work and not write posts in a BBS game-related....
If he did'nt use the work time in the correct way he deserve to be fired......
Wait, I have to go....
the boss is coming...
:D
-
P.S.
I can control everything the workers in my office do with internet and their PCs.
I mean, I am the only one with administrative rights and the autorization to control.
But WHO controls me? :D
MUHAHAHAHA !!! :D
-
Staga: So if he woud do it old fashion way by using pen, paper and envelope taken from his office the company could still rip those letters open and see whats inside?
Guess they can also listen their employers phonecalls too.
Here you get sentenced if you do that, guess people have more rights for their privacy here :)
You are way overboard involving constitutional issues here.
It has nothing to do with civic rights. If your employer is held responcible for things you do, he must have control over it. It's not a state policy. It's a private policy of a company and an employee enters it voluntarily. Do not accept a job if you do not like the conditions.
In my company, all incoming mail is opened and all outgoing faxes are copied and filed, as well as e-mail. Also regular correspondence sent by mail written on behalf of a company or in conjunction with the company must be approved.
It's them who get sued if you run scam on company letterhead paper or phone system, so why should they not be able to control it?
Nope but that doesn't give me any rights to open my workers emails, letters or listen his calls.
There is a reasonable expectation of privacy. So an employee has to be specifically warned - and sign for it - that he is aware of the monitoring. There are no personal e-mails in the company unless specifically arranged.
Karnak: In the United States it would mean those things.
B.S. It has nothing to do with US - it's a private business of any company.
Using the company's equipment, even mere office supplies, for personal business is theft.
B.S. again - you are being too general. In your company it may be so, in mine it may be different. Ever heard of a thing called "perks" or "standards" or "accepted practices"? They are different everywhere. You should really try to avoid those generalisations for no good reason.
Hortlund: If I use a piece of paper and a pen from work, and write a private letter
If you use a company letter-head or an envelope with a return adderss and or official stamp, no. Otherwise - yes. All e-mail by definition contains a company identification of origin on it, not just uses company servers. So it does belong to a company.
Hortlund: Geez what happened to the "land of the free",and the "rights of the individual. ... Hello 1984. "
That is exactly the freedom to run one's private business like on seems fit - not according to what some dupe believes he one should do.
What you are proposing is much closer to despotism - disallowing a business owner from running his business in his own way.
Do not confuse freedom from government oppression with freedom to enter into a voluntary contract of any kind with any individual and be bound by conditions of that contract.
miko
-
Anyway company reading private messages from individual to other, on paper or in emails, just sounds pretty "Orwellian" and disgusting but YMMV :)