A critical scenario about the dispute between Mr. Scott Sidell and his company, Structured Settlement Investments (SSI), will be discussed in this paper. The case has been contested in the court, and different people formed varying points of view about this. The ethical and professional issues that this case brings into question will also be discussed in this paper.
It seems very unethical for the company to go through Sidell’s emails on his personal email account i.e. Yahoo! Account without his permission. Though his email was open on that computer, ethics does not require ruining someone's privacy. Ethically, it is not acceptable to check someone's personal email account without his permission even if it is left open somewhere.
However, it is allowed professionally and is included in the company’s policy that the employer can monitor employees’ e-mail on the company’s computers. The only way of keeping the email accounts fully secured and private is to use remotely hosted personal e-mail as provided by Yahoo. Otherwise, companies clearly state this in their policy that they have the total authority to monitor any computer or equipment they provide to their employees.
It is unethical for Sidell’s employers to consult Sidell’s emails in his personal Yahoo! Mail account to his attorney as he was no more an employee of that company when his mail was read by someone else. Furthermore, he specified in the complaint he filed against the company that it went beyond the company’s rights to read the e-mail messages from the personal account of a fired worker.
The case affected the unsettled area of the United States law where certain variations in technology clash with the expectations regarding personal privacy of an employee, because as it is stated previously that a company has all the right to monitor and control any equipment provided by it.
It would matter which side contacts me first as I do not want to be in the news for supporting the wrong side. I would personally be on the company’s side as it has strong evidence, and it is written clearly in its policy that it can access any computer it provides to its employees. Professionally, the company had the right to monitor whatever it wants on its computers.
Integrity and Confidentiality are the codes of conduct or professional expectations that need to be applied in such cases to secure the privacy of employees and to maintain an environment of trust within the company. Employees should also take care of their personal stuff during working hours and should keep a check on whatever they are doing while using the company’s property. Otherwise, they should make their email ID more secured. They should ask for privacy from the email providers so that their emails are secured, and if they challenge concerned privacy issues in the court they will get full support from the email providers such as Yahoo! in Sidell’s case
According to the article presented in the New York Times, the case was still in search of proper claims supporting Mr. Sidell’s argument (Glater, 2008). Mr. Sidell alleged violations of the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2701 and Electronic Communications Privacy Act, that is 18 U.S.C. § 2510. On January 14, 2009, the United States District Court Judge ordered that the authority should first decide whether to practice jurisdiction over Sidell’s case of privacy claims in addition to the wrongful termination dispute. If it is declined then, Sidell can re-file his case.
References
Glater, J. D. (2008, June 27). A Company Computer and Questions About E-Mail Privacy. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/technology/27mail.html?_r=0
