Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Human rightsStaff monitoring

ECHR judgment and the tricky issue of email monitoring: What now for employers?

by Sarah Ozanne 13 Sep 2017
by Sarah Ozanne 13 Sep 2017

How should employers adapt their policies on monitoring employees’ use of email or other company systems in the wake of a recent ECHR decision? Sarah Ozanne explains. 

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights recently determined that a sales employee had his human rights breached when his employer did not notify him of its its intention to monitor his work email communications.

Further resources

Monitoring work-related Yahoo account breached employee’s human rights

HR policy and strategy: surveillance 

The decision in the Bărbulescu v Romania case is notable due to the contradictory decisions by the Chamber and the Grand Chamber of the ECHR. But the decision of the Chamber did not give employers carte blanche to access employee’s communications at work, and the decision of the Grand Chamber doesn’t it mean that employers cannot dismiss employees for personal use of work email in appropriate circumstances.

In fact, the decisions in this case simply reaffirm existing legal principles in this area of the law.

The ECHR has already previously held (in the case of Copland v UK) that a failure to inform an employee that their use of an employer’s IT system might be monitored was a breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to respect for private and family life, the home and correspondence.

Article 8 provides that a public authority shall not interfere with the exercise of an individual’s right to privacy except in certain circumstances, including the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Striking a balance

In an employment context, the law therefore requires that domestic courts strike a balance between the need of the employer to protect its business against the employee’s right to privacy.

When it comes to an individual’s right to privacy, employers need to be mindful of proportionality: by identifying a legitimate objective; ensuring that such an aim is sufficiently important to limit an individual’s right to privacy; and ensuring that the method chosen is no more than is necessary to achieve the objective.

The issue of employee monitoring under UK law has a fairly well developed regulatory framework.

This includes Article 8, but the key UK regulation is the Data Protection Act 1998, which is supported by guidance set out in the Employment Practices Code.

When considering monitoring employees at work, whether systematically or on an ad hoc basis, an employer should carry out an impact assessment considering the issue of proportionality (as highlighted above), and employees should be given information about the monitoring.

Notifying employees

The Code recommends that employees are notified of the circumstances in which monitoring will take place, the nature of the monitoring, how the information obtained through monitoring will be used and who it may be disclosed to – and the safeguards in place for employees who are the subject of monitoring.

It is not enough to inform employees generally that monitoring of some form may take place.

This area of law is the subject of further development with the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation next year and guidance being set out by the EU Article 29 Working Party.

The Working Party has recently produced useful guidance on the issue of monitoring in the workplace, taking into account the advances in technology available to do so and the complications of monitoring personal devices.

One of its suggestions is that employers offer alternative unmonitored access or use of their IT systems where employees can legitimately use the IT facilities for private use. Examples could include providing free Wi-Fi to employees for the use of personal devices, or an employer excluding certain types of traffic from its monitoring.

This could also include access to private webmail or online banking where interception is more likely to risk a breach of the balance between the employer’s legitimate interests and the employee’s privacy.

Employees could also be allowed to designate certain spaces within systems, such as calendars, as private.

Clear policy

Any measures like this should be accompanied by a clear IT policy, which would allow employees to adjust their behaviour so that they are monitored only in appropriate circumstances.

Overall, employers should give priority to preventing abuse of their IT systems, for example blocking access to certain websites, rather than detection. This reduces the need for and consideration of associated issues relating to monitoring in the workplace.

Another tricky area is the use of IT outside the immediate workplace, or where employees bring their own devices and use them during working hours. The key for employers is to approach the risk in all these areas of IT use in a proportionate, non-excessive way.

In short, employees communicating electronically from business premises can be protected under Article 8.

Based on the current Data Protection Directive, which is implemented in the UK through the Data Protection Act, employers may only collect data for legitimate purposes under appropriate conditions – bearing in mind the need to be proportionate and transparent.

Employers should communicate effectively with their staff about any monitoring to take place.

This should include the purpose of this monitoring, and the circumstances and possibilities for employees to prevent their data being captured by monitoring technologies. Policies relating to monitoring should be clear and accessible.

Avatar
Sarah Ozanne

Sarah Ozanne is Of Counsel at law firm CMS.

previous post
Eight in 10 ethnic minority leaders do not trust their organisations
next post
Five winning works from last year’s RAD Awards

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

Modern slavery: 10% of companies fail to publish...

26 Apr 2022

Work in the metaverse: what should HR prepare...

1 Apr 2022

Consulting and law firms exit Russian operations

7 Mar 2022

TUC warns against employee monitoring after Post Office...

28 Feb 2022

HSBC Holdings employees under scrutiny for WhatsApp use

23 Feb 2022

Why algorithms at work aren’t all bad

18 Jan 2022

How HR can get ahead of AI regulation

4 Jan 2022

IKEA staff found hidden camera in toilet

4 Oct 2021

Bounds Taxis drivers are workers, tribunal finds

22 Sep 2021

Gender-critical beliefs: Implications of EAT’s Forstater decision

23 Jun 2021
  • Strathclyde Business School expands its Degree Apprenticeship offer in England PROMOTED | The University of Strathclyde is expanding its programmes...Read more
  • The Search for Talent: Six Major Employer Pitfalls PROMOTED | The Great Resignation continues unabated...Read more
  • Navigating the widening “Skills Confidence Gap” in 2022, and beyond PROMOTED | Cornerstone OnDemand conducted a global study...Read more
  • Apprenticeships are the solution to your recruitment problems PROMOTED | Apprenticeships have the pulling power...Read more
  • What it really means to be mentally fit PROMOTED | What is mental fitness...Read more
  • How music can help to ease anxiety at work PROMOTED | A lot has happened since March 2020, hasn’t it?...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+