[BC] IT troubles

[Mike McCarthy]

Jason,

The 4th Amendment only applies to the government's intrusion into privacy, 
searches and seizures.  There are statutes which cover what you are 
referring and one of them is Sarbines/Oxley.  Others apply to sexual 
harassment, hostile work environments, job safety, etc. That said, 
monitoring of computer networks by the equipment owner and network service 
provider has been repeatedly upheld as being legal.  In fact, there are 
provisions in SOXA  which REQUIRES the retention of certain electronic 
correspondence by employees regardless of venue or method employed.

But in a sentence, YES, when you accept the position of employment, you 
agree not only to the rules and policies of the company, but those of the 
applicable statutes in your state and fed's as well.  You in effect waive 
all rights to any "privacy" when on the job/clock except when you're going 
to the rest room or in an employer locker room.

MM



At 06:35 PM 1/10/2008 -0600, JYRussell at academicplanet.com wrote
>So, are you saying as an employee you have absolutely no protection from
>unreasonable searches and seizures... because the company is free to
>determine what is "reasonable"... by your agreeing to work there, or by
>federal law?
>
>    what's to stop your employer from "seizing" anything he wants based on
>the grant he got from your remaining employed?
>
>    As in, the boss, the secretary, etc...  Let your imagination do what it
>might...  After she thinks he has violated her, one way or another...
>
>    Lets see.  Prior to the event,  she still works there, he is the
>'company', by remaining employed she agrees she has no 4th amendment rights.
>The feds have to reason to do anything against the employer even if she
>asks, as she has automatically waived her constitutional protection by
>remaining employed, under federal law. Hmmmm...
>
>    I think there must be some restrictions...
>
>Jason