Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 20, 2016
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.com
This question regarding whether employers reserve the right to search employee emails has become very controversial. It appears that Hillary Clinton is not the only one having her emails scrutinized. Since many workers do not have private email servers and rely on their employers’ electronic communication resources, it is fairly easy for employers to monitor workplace (and non-work) communications.According to a survey by the American Management Association (AMA), more than 50 percent of the responding businesses monitor employee email messages. In addition, 25 percent of the companies report that they have terminated an employee for misusing email.
Nonetheless, the legal principles that govern employers who monitor employee email accounts are complex and evolving. The legal construction of employer surveillance largely depends on the computer, email, or other relevant policies that have been adopted by the employer and communicated to the affected employees. However, in employment lawsuits involving email searches by companies without policies authorizing such searches, the courts have still largely sided with employers, particularly if they had a compelling business reason to read the email.
In City of Ontario v. Quon, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the City of Ontario (California) did not violate the Constitution when it audited the messages exchanged on pagers it provided to members its police SWAT team. In the unanimous decision, the Court held that the text message search did not violate the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable search and seizure because it was legitimately work-related.
“…the legal principles that govern employers who monitor employee email accounts are complex and evolving…”

To avoid liability, employee handbooks should make it clear that employees should have no expectation of privacy when it come to their work email accounts. For instance, the policies may expressly state that the systems are owned by the company and therefore can be accessed without notification or permission. These types of limitations are strengthened to the extent that the employer insists that its email system is used exclusively for business-related communications. It is recommended that employees are officially warned that “electronic files, e-mail, data files, images, software, and voice mail may be accessed at any time by management or other authorized personnel for any business purpose.”Even if the employers’ policies allow searches without notification, it is advised to keep employees apprised of such searches, provided it does not compromise the investigation. For instance, if conducting a sensitive sexual harassment investigation, the employer likely would not want the target employee to be given advance notification until the third party investigation has been completed. However, if management is investigating an email security breach or virus in the system, keeping all employees informed may actually help facilitate the process.
In any case, it is generally good practice to inform employees after the search has been conducted. This not only helps to maintain transparency and trust, but also reminds staff of the relevant policies regarding email monitoring.
This is an area of law that continues to evolve almost daily so it is very important to monitor all developments to insure that your policies align with current legal requirements.
If you have any questions regarding how to deal with your business’ email security or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me, Gary Young.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton

Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe

Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
Author: Chris Seelinger
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!