LETTER TO EDITOR OF ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH REGARDING WORKPLACE INTERNET USE, IN RESPONSE TO MISQUOTE

The following letter to the Editor of St. Louis Post-Dispatch is posted in full because it presents an overview of the legal issues which have arisen as a result of Internet use in the workplace, and it corrects a misquote of Susan Gindin in the May 9, 1999 issue. This letter was substantially abbreviated by St. Louis Post-Dispatch when published in the Letters to the Editor column. 

May 10, 1999 

Ms. Christine Bertelson, Editor
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
900 North Tucker
St. Louis, Missouri 63101 

Dear Ms. Bertelson: 

In Kyung M. Song's article, "Personal Use of Workplace E-mail is a Gray Area at Many Companies," in yesterday's issue of your newspaper, I was misquoted as saying that "it's unrealistic for employers to prohibit personal use of company computers." What I actually told Ms. Song was that employers have very good reasons for restricting, or even prohibiting, personal uses of company computers. Accordingly, it is realistic for employers to restrict personal uses of company computers. This issue is very important for your readers--employers and employees alike--and I feel that full clarification is essential. 

As I pointed out in my discussion of reasons employers restrict personal uses of company computers, with Ms. Song, and in my publication, Guide to E-Mail and the Internet in the Workplace, one reason is that employers are concerned about being held liable for the electronic misdeeds of employees. As Ms. Song noted in the article, employers have been sued for racial and sexual harassment on the basis of company e-mail. Also, actions have been brought against employers for defamation, for copyright infringement, and for National Labor Relations Act violations as a result of workplace e-mail and Internet activity. Another reason that employers restrict personal uses of company computers is concern regarding employee productivity. Studies have shown that employees with access to the Internet at work spend an average of five to ten hours per week sending personal e-mail or searching for information unrelated to their jobs. One study reported that in one month alone, employees at IBM, Apple Computer, and AT&T together visited Penthouse Magazine's Web site 12,823 times. As reported in the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 25, 1996), "Based on an average visit of 13 minutes, that comes to more than 347 eight-hour days." Employers are also concerned that employees will say or do things on the Internet or via e-mail that embarrass or harm the reputation of the employer. Additionally, employers may be concerned that employees' downloading of Internet pages with extensive graphics will tax the workplace system resources. 

On the other hand, many employees feel that restrictions on workplace computer use may violate their rights to privacy and to freedom of speech and expression, and some argue that sending e-mail and surfing the Internet at work is the equivalent of a lunch break. Further, some studies indicate that employee health problems, productivity, and morale deteriorate when employers monitor the workplace. 

In fact, many employers do permit a certain amount of personal use of workplace computers, and I have read that some employers do encourage employees to spend some time surfing the Internet as a way to promote technology savvy (although I am not aware of any employers which encourage employees to shop online, as Ms. Song writes in the article, and which she seems to attribute to me). 

However, the decision of an employer as to whether or not to restrict employee personal use of computers, the Internet, and e-mail, will depend on the needs and culture of the organization. I do strongly recommend that employers adopt carefully-drafted Internet, e-mail, and computer use policies, and that these policies be clearly communicated to employees, in order to reduce the number of disputes that arise as a result of misunderstandings relating to computer and Internet use. 

Sincerely,