Like this article? PLEASE +1 it! Evan Signature
Evan Carmichael Top Header about About Home Profiles articles Tools forums inspirational quotes About facebook Twitter YouTube Blog
Share for a Cause











A LEGAL LANDMINE: PRIVACY ISSUES IN THE 21ST CENTURY

Guest post by: Melissa Fleischer, Esq.

Article Overview: A brief overview of new legal policies surrounding social media. Between text messaging and cell phones, social media is playing host to all new legal issues for employers. This article will help break down some of the more common issues occurring and let employers know what they can and can't pursue within the legal limits.

Free Download - 5 Tips for Curbing FMLA Abuse: What HR Managers Need to Know By Melissa Fleischer, Esq.
Name: Email:

A LEGAL LANDMINE: PRIVACY ISSUES IN THE 21ST CENTURY

A hot topic for employers right now is keeping up with all the new technology and creating policies and practices to ensure lawful compliance with the employment discrimination laws as they intersect with all the new types of technology. We have noticed that one of our most popular webinars now is our webinar on drafting policies for the new social media including creating legally compliant policies for blogging, cell phones and text messaging. This webinar is so popular because employers are literally scrambling to figure out how to handle this explosion of social media in the workplace.

Of course, together with this social media explosion come a host of legal issues that employers are exposed to and need to plan for. One interesting issue that has arisen is the issue of an employee's right to privacy when their employer monitors and reviews their text messages. The US Supreme Court has recently agreed to hear such a case which should lend some guidance on this technologically advanced legal issue. However, since this case involved an action by an employer that was a city, it involved the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures which would not be applicable if this situation arose with a private employer. Nevertheless, many employment lawyers are awaiting the outcome of this case to provide some direction on this interesting issue.

In this case, Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., the Supreme Court will decide whether the City of Ontario in California violated Seargent Quon's, constitutional right to privacy when it reviewed text messages that he sent on his pager provided by the City. Mr. Quon was a Seargent on Ontario's SWAT Team. The employer in this case, the City of Ontario, had the standard language in its e-mail policies stating that employees should not have any expectation of privacy and that the electronic messages could and would be monitored by the City. When the pagers were given to the employees, they were given a copy of the e-mail policy and told that it applied to the text messages on the pagers.

However, it turned out that there were statements by Seargent Quon's supervisor to Seargent Quon stating that the text messages would not be monitored as long as any employee that went over in the amount of text messages they were allotted for the month paid for the overages. In addition, it turned out that the City had not actually monitored Mr. Quon's pager or any of the other police officers' pagers for a period of approximately eight months after the employees were given the pagers.

When the City started monitoring Quon's text messages, they found that he had used the pager and text messages for his own personal use which was a violation of the City's e-mail policy and that there were some sexually explicit text messages. The Seargent and his wife sued the City of Ontario claiming a violation of their right to privacy. The Ninth Circuit issued a decision in this case holding that the City of Ontario had violated Mr. Quon's right to privacy. Crucial to the Ninth Circuit were the fact that although the City's policy stated that employees should have no expectation of privacy, this had been negated by both the supervisor's statements as well as the practice of the City of not monitoring the text messages for such a long period.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the Supreme Court decides this case which should happen by June 2010. One thing is clear. Employers need to be extremely careful to not take any action that would be inconsistent with the declaration in their policy that employees should not have any expectation of privacy. Just as with at-will employment, it appears that a supervisor's statements that are contrary to an employer's policy and an employer's actions that are inconsistent with that policy can negate the statement in the policy and destroy the employer's defense in such cases. Moreover, it is important for employers to not just use the e-mail policies they have as the City of Ontario did in this case, but rather to develop and create legally sound social media policies that adequately address all of these important issues.

The lesson for employers is clear. Not only is it important to have well-drafted social media, cell phone and texting policies but it is equally important to provide training to your managers so they understand how to avoid making any statements that could negate the no expectation of privacy statement in your policy. The training should also help employers ensure that their practices and actions are consistent with the policy and don't defeat the representations in the policy. If you state that you will be monitoring employees' text messages, clearly you should ensure that you are doing this on a consistent basis to prevent an employee's arguments that your failure to do so provided him with a reasonable expectation of privacy despite the statement to the contrary in the policy.

It is not easy for employers to stay one step ahead in this ever changing technologically advanced world we live in. However, with proper guidance on how to draft effective policies and proper training, employers can manage to ensure that their workplaces are legally compliant and that they are protected from the legal landmines that the 21st century social media and technologies have brought.

Copyright© 2010 HR Learning Center LLC

Related Articles
  The Vision
  Population Perspectives
  Sales 2.0 - Answer to Our Prayers or Costly Distraction?
  21st Century / AIG Insurance Company - Car Insurance Coverage
  Governing your Corporate Website
  Sorting out
  Entrepreneurs: The New Superheroes
  Web can make or break business
  "What Happens in Vegas..." is No Way to Run a Business! Employment References are Essential.
  Web Templates for Web Designing
  Home Security For Better Home Insurance Rates - Legal Issues
  Attorneys using Facebook to serve legal papers
  The Role of Organizational Design in 21st Century Organizations.
  Legal Marketing: Protect your Facebook from unwanted intruders
  Manage or Coach
  New Age Management
  Business Leadership - What it Takes to Differentiate Yourself in the 21st Century
  Going back to basics
  Statutory Agent
  Blogging Africa into the 21st Century

Home > Human-Resources > Melissa Fleischer, Esq. > A LEGAL LANDMINE PRIVACY ISSUES IN THE 21ST CENTURY >
Article Tags: blogging, cell phones, privacy rights, Quon case, social media, social media policy, text massages, texting policy, violation of right to privacy

About the Author: Melissa Fleischer, Esq.
RSS for Melissa's articles - Visit Melissa's website

Melissa Fleischer, Esq. is the Founder and President of HR Learning Center LLC, a human resources consulting firm specializing in the area of employment law. HR Learning Center LLC provides training seminars and consulting on a wide range of workplace and human resource issues. Ms. Fleischer is a management-side employment attorney with over twenty (20) years experience and is nationally recognized as an expert in her field. She has successfully represented numerous clients in employment discrimination litigation as well as providing preventive counseling and training on workplace issues. Ms. Fleischer is a frequent lecturer on a wide range of employment law topics including seminars and workshops on Anti-Harassment Training, FMLA/ADA Training and Workplace Violence Prevention Training. As President of HR Learning Center LLC, Ms. Fleischer provides proactive solutions to management on a variety of employment law issues including sexual and unlawful harassment, workplace violence, FMLA and ADA. Ms. Fleischer provides on-site and on-line training seminars on important employment law topics. Ms. Fleischer can be contacted at 914-417-1715 or via e-mail at Melissa.fleischer@hrlearningcenter.com.

Click here to visit Melissa's website
Dashed Line

More from Melissa Fleischer, Esq.
TWO LESSONS LEARNED FOR EMPLOYERS FROM MANCHESTER CT SHOOTING
Protect your Workplace from the Violence and Murder of Annie Le at Yale University
5 Tips for Curbing FMLA Abuse What HR Managers Need to Know
Employee Handbook Red Flags For MultiState Employers
A LEGAL LANDMINE PRIVACY ISSUES IN THE 21ST CENTURY


Related Forum Posts
Information about doing franchise business in China Information about doing franchise business in China - CHINA’S FRANCHISE LEGAL SYSTEM Introduction Franchises has a history of more than one hundred years in foreign countries, now it has developed to be a mature business mode, and it is widely used in many countries, especially the developed ones. Recently, franchises has been developing fast in China, covering more than sixty industries and trades such as catering, retailing, clothes-washing, indoor decorations and gym. However, the market order of franchises is chaotic in some industries and areas. There are also some illegal and criminal activities under the guise of franchises. Under such circumstances, several important laws have been promulgated to regulate the commercial franchising activities. Applicable Legislation The main legislative provisions governing the commercial franchising in the PRC are: the Measures on Administration of Commercial Franchises; and the Measures on Administration of Archival Filing of Commercial Franchises; and the Measures on Administration of Information Disclosure of Commercial Franchises Qualification for Franchisors According to the laws, the franchisors as those enterprises who own such business sources as registered trademarks, enterprise logos, patents and proprietary technology, and license these business sources to franchisees. Firstly, the franchisors shall be enterprises, excluding other economic organizations and individuals. Secondly, the trademarks which can be licensed to franchisees shall be registered trademarks. According to the Trademark Law, the trademarks, whether registered or not, are protected under the laws, though there is difference in the vigor and extents of protection. It seems that the Ministry of Commerce has restrictions in recognizing trademarks, since it only provides “own trademarks to be licensed to others” at large, which causes chaos in practice. In the cases relevant to franchising disputes which we provided legal service to, all of them involve the situation that the franchisors granted licenses of non-registered trademarks or the trademarks which were in application to others, and when there was infringement on trademarks, the franchisors were unable to prevent infringement on trademarks. Then the interests of the franchisees could not be realized. What’s more, franchising activities with non-registered trademarks also, to some extent, encourage commercial frauds. Thirdly, the logos, patents and proprietary technology of enterprises are included in the business sources to be licensed to others for the first time, which enlarges the application scope of franchises and will improve the development of franchises. Requirements to be Met in Carrying on Franchising Activities In addition to the condition that only the enterprises will be allowed to carry on franchising activities referred to above, the franchisors shall also have mature business modes, and are able to provide business guidance, technology support and training. The enterprises which copy the manuals, websites and enlisting documents of others, and have no service abilities for providing business guidance, technology support and training shall be excluded. What needs pointing out is that even these enterprises that are allowed to carry on business may face with the suits claiming them for unfair competition and infringements on intellectual properties. In addition, the Measures clearly request that the franchisors shall operate at least two directly operated shops, and the period of operation shall be more than 1 year, which aims to prevent frauds by the way of franchising. Information Disclosure Requirements and Regulation on Franchisors Information disclosure system is the core system of franchising. The laws provides that the franchisors shall establish and implement a perfect information disclosure system, and provide the relevant information and franchising contracts in written form, at least thirty days before execution of franchising contracts. It also sets out the specific provisions on the information which shall be provided by franchisors, including the basic conditions and commercial reputation records of the franchisors and their legal representatives, business sources owned by franchisors, abilities of franchisors to provide service to franchisees and management and supervision on business of franchisees, franchisee fees and the payments, and budgets for investment in franchising shops. To the franchisors that violate these provisions, the authorities in charge of commerce will order them to rectify, charge penalties and make public statements. Archival Filing and Public Announcement Systems To protect the franchisees’ lawful rights and interests, considering the asymmetric information between franchisors and franchisees, in addition to intensifying information disclosure requirements and regulating the activities of franchisors, the Measures also bring in the archival filing and public announcement systems. The Measures provides that the franchisors shall make a filing with the commerce administrative department within 15 days after the execution of franchising contracts for the first time. Anyone who intends to engage in any commercial franchise activities within a province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government shall go through the archival filing formalities in the commerce administrative department of the people’s government of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government where the franchisors are located. Anyone who intends to engage in any commercial franchise activities beyond a province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government shall go through archival filing formalities in the commerce administrative department of the State Council. Any franchisor having been engaging in franchise activities before May 1, 2007 shall apply for archival filing at the commercial administrative department. The Ministry of Commerce has established the national network for archival filing work relating to commercial franchise. Any franchisor shall go through the archival formalities through the government website. The general public may obtain the following information through the government website of the Ministry of Commerce: (1)The registered trademark(s), enterprise mark(s), patent(s), know-how and other business resources of the franchisor; (2)The franchisor’s archival filing date; (3)The location of the legal business place, contact information and name of the legal representative of the franchisor; and (4)The location of the business place of the franchisee(s) within China. The authorities in charge of filing will cancel the archival filing if there is any following activities of franchisors, and make public announcement on the government website: (1) the business licenses of the franchisors have been withdrawn by the registration administrative authorities for illegal business; (2) the authorities in charge of filing receive judicial suggestion letter on cancellation of archival filing from the judiciary for illegal business by franchisors; (3) the franchisors conceal the relevant information or provide false information, which has been proved; (4) the franchisors carry on cancellation by themselves. In addition, the illegal activities of the franchisors will be announced to the public. By Erex Chen, a Chinese lawyer based in Shanghai.


Recommended Article for You close

  The Vision

Share this article with your friends. Fund someone's dream.

Leave a comment below or share on the left and you'll help support entrepreneurs in Africa through our partnership with Kiva. Over $50,000 raised and counting - Please keep sharing! Learn more.



Featured Article

Bottom Footer



Newsletter

Get advice & tips from famous business
owners, new articles by entrepreneur
experts, my latest website updates, &
special sneak peaks at what's to come!
Name:
Email:
Popular Articles

10 Golden rules to survive the Global Crisis

Adapting to Technology and the Internet

9 tips to increase ROI in PPC Campaigns

Suggestions

Email us your ideas on how to make our
website more valuable! Thank you Sharon
from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for
your suggestions to make the newsletter
look like the website and profile younger
entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez.