I face a dilema - Monitoring Software

[lemon_fresh]

A company I do IT work for is run by a pair of twins. The twin I report is paranoid. I've been asked to research and price a product by the name of Eblaster/SpectorCNE so he can see what his people are working when they are on their pcs. He likes that it has the ability to shoot him a copy of any e-mails they send. That was his big thing, can I see there e-mails and what they are doing.

I feel icky just thinking about having to install this thing.

http://www.spectorsoft.com/

So my question to you is two fold:
1. Who here gets the computer usage monitored at work? I'm not just talking about filtering either, I mean someone is looking at logs to see what you did on the pc that day.
2. What are my moral/ethical obligations here? At a minimum I'm gonna ask for a memo that goes to all of his employees letting them know that monitoring is in place and an update to his employee manual.

 

[zengirl]

If the company owns the computers and pays for the internet, and for the employees, whatever the employees do during work hours and/or with company resources is the company's property.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

 

[b_sinning]

You work for a bitch. We have the ability to monitor anything but don't. We only do that when someone gets fired and the lawyers want some proof the person deserved it.

 

[water]

If the company owns the computers and pays for the internet, and for the employees, whatever the employees do during work hours and/or with company resources is the company's property.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

While it is a little paranoid, and annoying to the employees, I'm inclined to agree with Miss Zen.

 

[Bubbles]

I thought the title read "I have a face dilemma" - I was going to point you to the thread about the face transplants.

 

[lemon_fresh]

If the company owns the computers and pays for the internet, and for the employees, whatever the employees do during work hours and/or with company resources is the company's property.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Oh, no don't get me wrong, he pays for the PCs and the bandwith, so he ultimately says what can or can't be done with it. I personally think its a waste of time & money, but if he thinks he can squeeze another $.02 a day out of his employees this way.....

 

[zengirl]

Oh, no don't get me wrong, he pays for the PCs and the bandwith, so he ultimately says what can or can't be done with it. I personally think its a waste of time & money, but if he thinks he can squeeze another $.02 a day out of his employees this way.....

If I knew my internet usage was monitored, my company would sure get a lot more than $0.02 a day outta me.

 

[theacoustician]

If the company owns the computers and pays for the internet, and for the employees, whatever the employees do during work hours and/or with company resources is the company's property.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Here's the problem of doing it without notification. What if through email, the boss finds out someone is gay and fires them. At that point its discrimination. The business can do as they please, but changing corporate policy like that without prior notification to employees is basically entrapment.

If they're warned and they still do something that's out of policy, then they get what they deserve.

 

[lemon_fresh]

You work for a bitch. We have the ability to monitor anything but don't. We only do that when someone gets fired and the lawyers want some proof the person deserved it.

There's no way in hell I could work for these guys. I do some contracting / consulting for them but shit like this is just a minor example of the rather crappy work environment they create for people.

 

[zengirl]

Here's the problem of doing it without notification. What if through email, the boss finds out someone is gay and fires them. At that point its discrimination. The business can do as they please, but changing corporate policy like that without prior notification to employees is basically entrapment.

If they're warned and they still do something that's out of policy, then they get what they deserve.

It's the same as overhearing a convrsation at the watercooler. Still grounds for wrongful termination, but employees are not entitled to electronic privacy.

 

[lemon_fresh]

If I knew my internet usage was monitored, my company would sure get a lot more than $0.02 a day outta me.

Do you see anything wrong with slacking all day while "at work"?

 

[water]

Here's the problem of doing it without notification. What if through email, the boss finds out someone is gay and fires them. At that point its discrimination. The business can do as they please, but changing corporate policy like that without prior notification to employees is basically entrapment.

If they're warned and they still do something that's out of policy, then they get what they deserve.

I don't think it's all that much like entrapment. If the employee is using their work resources for work related communication their sexual preference, and other personal information which could lead to biased termination, should never come up and there should be no problem.

 

[zengirl]

Do you see anything wrong with slacking all day while "at work"?

Of course I do.

but I'm a hypocrite, and weak, so what can I do?

 

[theacoustician]

I don't think it's all that much like entrapment. If the employee is using their work resources for work related communication their sexual preference, and other personal information which could lead to biased termination, should never come up and there should be no problem.

The legal problem then is proving you fired them because they were goofing off and not because they were gay in that example. That's why you send out a warning first. Like I said, after the warning, whatever. Without it, you're asking for HR trouble.

 

[water]

Of course I do.

but I'm a hypocrite, and weak, so what can I do?

Just go with it girl. It's a natural feeling your having, just let it ride. Yeah, that's right, just do what feels good to your body. Awww, yeah....um...sorry, I got lost there for a second.

 

[water]

The legal problem then is proving you fired them because they were goofing off and not because they were gay in that example. That's why you send out a warning first. Like I said, after the warning, whatever. Without it, you're asking for HR trouble.

This is a problem with today's technology. Unlike phone taps (which have laws around them to protect the "innocent" obviously) there is no legislation or written policy which governs whether or not employers can track computer usage without notifying the individuals. Or if anything found there can be used as evidence to term that individual.

 

[zengirl]

This is a problem with today's technology. Unlike phone taps (which have laws around them to protect the "innocent" obviously) there is no legislation or written policy which governs whether or not employers can track computer usage without notifying the individuals. Or if anything found there can be used as evidence to term that individual.

I always thought it was just common sense to assume that any corporate computer use was monitored or could be monitored at any time?

And theac... as a standard template for any company handbook, theres a special section dedicated to computer use:

 

[water]

I always thought it was just common sense to assume that any corporate computer use was monitored or could be monitored at any time?

Pretty much, basically, mostly, yes.

People slip through the cracks for long periods of time occasionally, but look at the stats and you'll find that if you browse or produce "questionable content" at work they will catch you.

 

[b_sinning]

You just have to do like I do. Be the person that people would come to see about doing the monitoring. LOL

 

[zengirl]

So, on this note...

Ooo uuhh... I've been emailing back and forth with my mom while she's been at work, and we go back and forth quite a bit (like beyond excessively) and about 5 minutes ago I just got this email from her:

"Hey, I just got fired!!!"


Oops