Comments on: Employee uses work computer to harass neighbor: Company liable?

By: bernard keefer

bernard keefer — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:39:28 +0000

I think there was a hell of a lot of noise for a little kid peeing in someone’s yard. Don’t folks have something better to do?

By: Dwayne

Dwayne — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:02:04 +0000

A person has a responsibility for their actions. A company has a responsibility for the use of its resources. From what I read there were rules and regs in place in the company for use of technology based resources. If you tighten things to tight a resource is no longer a resource. If you take no steps as a company to control resource use then you are being irresponsible and should be held to a level of accountability. In this case I would have to agree that this is a lawsuit for cash situation, as long as the employee was NOT authorized to use company resources for this action AND the employee was disciplined in some reasonable manner, then I would say litigation against the company is with out merit.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:46:33 +0000

Who is selling “Policies and Procedures for the Electronics Age?” Everytime I see an article like this, I feel like its another advertisement for something we don’t need.

In this case, if the Sigler’s had complained to the company that the source of the harassment was coming from one of their computers and staff, and the compnay took no action, I would say the company would be seen as complicite and would bear some liability.

But there is no evidence that the company did anything wrong. They had a policy against personal use of company equipment. We have one too. It covers ALL company equipment, not just computers. We also have a policy governing harassment of others and not doing anyhting that would bring discredit to the organization. Given the stated circumstances, this employee would most certainly have been suspended with a good possibility for termination.

This employee could have just as easily used the computer at a library or even a cell phone. When policies get so specific that they identify specific technologies, then they always will be inadequate because technology is always changing.

By: Roland

Roland — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:30:14 +0000

I tend to agree with Walt that this was a case of a lawyer and clients trying to seek the big bucks. I reality however, the employee should be disciplined for abuse of company property. The offended party I would suspect has the right to seek damages in a civil suit against the employee for any and all expenses incurred.

By: Walt Spawr

Walt Spawr — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 17:15:19 +0000

The reason this case went to court was because the attorney against CUNA was after the big money he hoped to get from the “deepest pockets” (CUNA) for his attorney fees. This should not be an HR matter. I hope CUNA collected thier attorney fees for defending this case. I think most HR litigation is brought because attorneys are out of control chasing companies with deep monetary pockets. No matter how complete our company policies are, there will always be these nonsense HR law suites.

By: Walt Spawr

Walt Spawr — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:59:13 +0000

The only way this case went to court was because the attorney against Cuna was after the big money he hoped to get from the “deepests pockets” (Cuna) for his attoney fees. I hope Cuna collected thier attorney fees for defending this case. Most HR law suites are brought because attorneys are out of control chasing companies with deep pockets.

By: K. Hamm

K. Hamm — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:53:01 +0000

I, too, wonder if the employee was disciplined. You’d think – if nothing else – that actions by an employee that reflect badly on the organization would be cause for some sort of disciplinary action. We have a policy in place that addresses that issue.

By: Hal Connor

Hal Connor — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:12:15 +0000

The article does not state whether the employee was disciplined. The litigator, if he/she did not do so, should have filed an action against the employee based on the computer usage policies of the employer. The employer should have commenced disciplinary action for misuse of company property. Suspension or termination is appropriate in such an extreme case.

Likewise, Thomas Kobinsky had legal recourse against his neighbor for allowing the child to commit a lewd act in public.

Evidently, no one in this case separated the forest from the trees.

By: Jim Plank

Jim Plank — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:25:31 +0000

I would suggest that “any” harassment between employees, computer or otherwise, should be dealt with according to internal harassment policies and EEOC guidelines the same as all other kinds of harassment.