On Wednesday 06 June 2007 11:41:55 Andy Green wrote: > > As someone remarked about the US, employers here are legally responsible > > for the actions of their employees. I can't tell you any specific > > circumstances where companies would decide that it is necessary. I > > believe that companies where a lot of employees have Internet access do > > sometimes put this into their policy, not to use routinely, but in case > > they need to investigate a problem. The key point is that employees must > > have been told in their contract that they can be monitored. It cannot > > be legally done without the knowledge of the employee in question. > > Another practical issue is that most IM traffic is encrypted nowadays > anyway. You can run vnc to see their actual chat session visually or > turn on their chat logging and check the files on the client it but it > doesn't sound like it makes for a good work environment... it sounds > like the kind of thing they'll be wanting to complain about on IM... > > Seems to be another good reason not to be employed by a company... > > http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2005/06/is_your_boss_reading_you >r_emai.html > I can assure you that it's not nice to know that you can be imprisoned for something that an employee has done. I'm glad I'm retired and will never have to employ anyone again. Anne
