What lengths are our employers going to in order to protect their information?

Whether you have just a phone connection at work or more gadgets than you can shake a stick at, the chances are thatwhat you say and what you do are being kept on record.

If you have access to the internet, phone, email, or fax machines then it really is about time that you paid some serious attention to what you are saying and who you are saying it to.

The UK Government is alleged to be part of a group that is lobbying the European Union to ensure that ISP's (Internet Service Providers) and telecoms companies maintain a log of all telephone calls, faxes, and internet and email usage for seven years.

However, as recently as May 22nd, 2001 the Home Office has denied that it has any plans to order ISP's to operate in this way, although Home Secretary Jack Straw has admitted that serious consideration has to be given to this.

Many claim that this type of action is wholly justified if criminal investigations of all levels are going to be initiated, despite the clear potential for violating our human rights.

Another major objection that is expected on the part of many UK organisations is that the cost of having to store up to seven years of data, will, for many companies prove to be potentially crippling on their business.

Work Security and Privacy

We all know that most of us do not spend most of our working day downloading pornography from the internet or emailing best friends and family in Outer Mongolia…But personal use and abuse of the equipment that your company provides is rapidly becoming a major issue in the UK, especially in light of the relatively few cases that have hit the headlines so far where multiple sackings have been forced in order to reiterate this point.

Although many of you are probably not aware, the Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations came into force last month. These regulations were viewed by many to be a 'carte blanche ' for companies and organisations to snoop on staff.

The regulations do allow businesses to intercept and monitor emails, telephone calls and use of the internet without getting the consent of the employee, but this has to be for certain 'legitimate' purposes. The legitimate purposes are laid out as follows:

• ·to detect crime and the unauthorised use of telecom systems

• ·to protect against viruses and other similar purposes

• ·to determine whether communications are relevant to the business

• ·for quality control purposes

The danger here is clear. The remit here seems to be rather wide and therefore most employers will be able to take it upon themselves to justify intercepting and monitoring the work behaviour of their employees under just one of the above.

You must also be aware that while your employer is not required by law to tell you that your calls and messages may be intercepted they are still required to make sure that 'all reasonable efforts' are made to let you know that such activity is going on.

Naturally we are following in the footsteps of the United States with taking the initiative over workplace related data-capture. Only very recently the American Management Association published its annual survey on workplace monitoring and surveillance.

The survey found that 78 per cent of large U.S. firms are recording and reviewing their employees' electronic communications. This surveillance includes the storage and review of telephone conversations, voice-mail and e-mail messages, and computer files. Employers are also reportedly monitoring internet connections and video taping employee performance.

However, the majority of the monitoring that took place was in the form of spot-checking employees rather than 24-hour surveillance, and of those who took part in the survey, 90 per cent said that they inform their employees that the monitoring is taking place.

Most concerning was the revelation that two thirds of the employers have disciplined employees for abuse of office e-mail or the internet, and more than one third have dismissed employees for such abuse.

Monitoring was also found to be most popular in the financial sector with 92 per cent of firms monitoring their employees, and least popular in public administration.

Are you scared? Is this really Big Brother?

The answers to the above are: You shouldn't be, and, no not really. The Office of the Information Commissioner issued a draft code of practice shortly after the regulations surfaced, warning employers that they are required to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998.

The Data Protection Act 1998 was introduced to ensure that all your personal data is processed in a manner that is lawful and fair and therefore should your employer monitor your communications then it should not intrude on the employees' 'privacy and autonomy'.

The code makes it clear that employers should not monitor the content of calls and emails and that private messages should not be opened.

Will I always be listened to? What about the Human Rights Act?
Telecoms watchdog Oftel has stated that employees should be forewarned that a form of telephone monitoring is taking place and that there should be private lines at the place of work that will be excluded from monitoring.

This brings in a very important subject…. The Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act gives us all a right to privacy for private and family life, and the Human Rights Act can be quoted even when employers are working within the guidelines of the regulations stated above.

Yes, you've guessed it; even the Human Rights Act has exceptions. Namely, if your employer feels that they are acting for the prevention of crime, or in the interests of national security (also crime related) then they are justified.

The courts have still yet to be fully tested on a number of workplace privacy related issues, but to coin a phrase 'it's only a matter of time'.

But where do I stand?
If you are genuinely concerned about the level of security that your organisation has adopted it would be wise for you to check whether they have a written policy on email and internet use in place. The policy has to state exactly what is and what is not allowed in terms of the use of company equipment, and also to what extent communications can be monitored.

The policy should also not be kept under lock and key, as it should have been fully circulated within the organisation. Should your organisation be uncooperative regarding this matter and you have a fair reason to question this (i.e., they have issued disciplinary actions although there is no sight of a policy) then it would be sensible to contact your local Citizen's Advice Bureau who should be able to point you in the right direction of an employment solicitor.

Conclusion

It has been alleged that in the UK over 200,000 TV cameras capable of covert surveillance have been sold. Phone tapping, or 'monitoring' as we have referred to it is advertised…as follows..'Telephone calls may be monitored or recorded for training purposes'.

While we are all aware that many calls are monitored for training purposes, there are surely many that aren't monitored for that reason.

So please take it upon yourself to know your rights, so take this checklist away with you:

• The best place to start is to read your employer's privacy, confidentiality and monitoring policy - along with any specific rules on email and/or telephone usage - but remember that these should really have been explained to you first.
• What form is the monitoring taking?
• Make a point of looking further into this topic to see how surveillance systems work.
• If you think that your job might be on the line then foolhardy email and internet abuse might be the quickest way that they can get rid of you, so beware.

Keep your finger on the pulse of legal developments and their response as the law and the way that the law is enforced are under a lot of scrutiny at present - and the Data Protection Registrar is looking to strengthen the case of the employee!

The Home Office has denied it has any plans to order ISPs to retain data traffic for seven years to aid police forces in their fight against crime.

The statement came in response to a wave of speculation that Home Secretary Jack Straw will recommend a seven-year mandatory retention period for ISPs at next week's EU Council of Ministers meeting to discuss cross-border co-operation on crime. "The general policy of the UK government is that there are no plans to do so at this stage. Serious consideration would have to be given to such a move, taking into account not only law enforcement, but also the needs of ISPs and civil liberties issues," said a Home Office spokesman.

On 29 May, a meeting is scheduled for the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council to address a number of issues, including money-laundering, human trafficking and drug smuggling. It is understood that data traffic will be discussed as a means to combat crime, but will not be the central focus of the discussion.