tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post7722400844861684608..comments2024-01-10T03:22:18.004-08:00Comments on Bryan Schwartz Law: Using Company Email to Communicate with Your Employment LawyerBryan Schwartz Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-90699811822806515242011-12-11T22:55:13.057-08:002011-12-11T22:55:13.057-08:00Nice post. Thanks
employment lawyers ChicagoNice post. Thanks<br /><a href="http://www.wpdlegal.com/" rel="nofollow">employment lawyers Chicago<br /></a>Rozer Struarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05133190903665270086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-59988381027553230302011-11-19T12:55:31.682-08:002011-11-19T12:55:31.682-08:00We have a fair use computer policy as well as a st...We have a fair use computer policy as well as a standard disclosure that they may monitor "for all lawful purposes." The statement itself suggests that there are some unlawful purposes, and I think you've touched on the most obvious one - attorney client privilege.<br /><br />But is there privileged communication between an employee under investigation and his union representative? I believe there should be. Also, what about emails and documents collected as evidence for a grievance or lawsuit against the employer for unlawful practices? Following a grievance, my employer imaged my hard drive on the pretext of malware, but comments from the IT guy revealed otherwise.<br /><br />Some cases have established rights of privacy for government employees. The employer must have reasonable suspicion for some intrusions.<br /><br />This is going to become an issue with me soon as my employer has been trying to monitor my anonymous internet conversations with a view toward finding some release of proprietary information or improper use. Big Brother is here, and we don't love him.Hot Samhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10848778804406692799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-14258164365368646092009-10-27T17:06:12.428-07:002009-10-27T17:06:12.428-07:00The New Jersey Court of Appeal recently issued an ...The New Jersey Court of Appeal recently issued an illuminating opinion agreeing, essentially, with my blog post. Read Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, et al., DOCKET NO. A-3506-08T13506-08T1 (June 26, 2009):<br /><br />http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/decisions/appellate/a3506-08.opn.htmlBryan Schwartz Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-83144433970345718602009-05-06T09:21:00.000-07:002009-05-06T09:21:00.000-07:00I respectfully disagree with Mr. Ballard, for the ...I respectfully disagree with Mr. Ballard, for the reasons stated in the article. Merely publishing a blanket denunciation of privilege in a company handbook does not eliminate all expectations if privacy with respect to all company email. If it did, then in-house company lawyers communicating with company employees would also have no protected privilege as to their communications.Bryan Schwartz Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10509090710437656270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5195531732750182551.post-34007246882597199972009-04-24T08:18:00.000-07:002009-04-24T08:18:00.000-07:00There is no privilege and therefore no "inadverten...There is no privilege and therefore no "inadvertent disclosure" if the employee has no expectation of privacy in e-mail communications with his attorney via his employer's computer systems. Most savvy employers make clear in their employee handbooks that employee's e-mail and other internet activities are limited and subject to monitoring and collection. Without that expectation of privacy the employee is simply exposing his discussion with his attorney to his employer's review.Daniel Ballard, Esq.https://www.blogger.com/profile/03173838265543158040noreply@blogger.com