Hacker News Reader

Comment by WhatsName | Hacker News Reader

This is terrifying. In my country it is strictly illegal to monitor employees, not just cameras, but also private internet usage on work computers.

Also from a managers perspective I find this quite unproductive micromanagement. What do they get from this data?

View on HN

What's your country? I don't know of any where work computers are intended for private internet usage.

In the Netherlands there is something akin to a 'fair use' provision for private usage of employer devices (email, iPad, mobile phone).

General thought (example) is that if you keep private emails on corporate adresses nicely separated in a seperate folder 'private' they should stay out of such folders.

Are you sure that's not your employer's fair user policy? While you were typing this, I happened to be googling (in Dutch) and could find pretty much nothing of the sort. I found a good deal of articles saying that the lack of an employer's specific policy would make it harder to enforce, but that's still quite a ways away from it being allowed.

Full disclosure: last time another user called me out to a blatant mistake regarding Dutch law.

So this time, I come well-sourced. My favorite blogging lawyer Arnoud Engelfriet: [1][2][3]. And some more [4] - A man who had to return wages after having spent 58 hours on Whatsapp while (not) working, note that he was not fired!. Number [5] tops it all - giving away company secrets on an employers phone is protected.

[1] https://blog.iusmentis.com/2016/10/17/mag-werkgever-privebes... [2] https://blog.iusmentis.com/2017/09/13/oh-baas-mag-toch-meegl... [3] https://blog.iusmentis.com/2012/02/02/mag-mijn-ex-werkgever-... [4] http://eisenmann.org/nieuws/67/privegebruik-van-de-zakelijke... [5] https://blog.iusmentis.com/2017/08/14/ook-berichten-op-zakel...

Actually I think this time we are both right. For non-exhaustibles and where usage is really widespread (email, whatsapp) it is clear that some private use is allowed. Main underlying argument is privacy. So that's a sort of negative defense. You can't prohibit it, since you are not allowed to monitor it's usage.

For exhaustibles company specific guidelines can limit or prohibit. The test against those guidelines will be 'is it reasonable'.

On the other hand, taking physical goods (printing paper, disposed machinery) is still ground for termination.

Last link doesn't work for me. The others focus mostly on the expectation of privacy that an employee has. Which makes it certainly harder to assert that a device was used for private purposes. But these articles don't really establish that private "fair" use is by definition allowed. I'd argue that if the employer had a way to determine in a noninvasive way that you used the computer for private purposes, that these articles hardly apply. How about some endpoint security scanner that asserts that you have illegal MP3s... in a folder called "Private"?

What you and I both found is that employers need to treat employees equal, when asserting private use, and that it's a tough case in court anyhow, but that's not the same as it being legal.

>>> You can't prohibit it, since you are not allowed to monitor it's usage.

Yes you can! It's very common for companies to block access to gmail.com facebook.com and similar websites.

I am not a laywer but that's a clear message that's it's not allowed. Circumventing with proxies/VPN should be grounded enough for termination.

I'm guessing Germany or Austria.

Point is: It doesn't matter if they are intended or not - the employer isn't allowed to track it, unless you have an agreement between Betriebsrat(works council) and company. (Don't know the regulations though for the case when the company doesn't have a Betriebsrat.)

Yet private computers and phones are used for company purposes. According to the article employers in the US apparently even think it's normal to force employees to install software on their private devices. Some leeway in the other direction would seem very reasonable.

>>> Yet private computers and phones are used for company purposes.

And they should not. Any sane company with a legal department would be clear about that.

I agree though that there is an endless supply of startups and bad companies trying to move these costs over to you. How about you pay for your work laptop and work phone? A good sign to go work somewhere else.

I have the option of a company phone, but prefer a personal phone with a company app for access to company resources.

I don’t want to carry two devices. I don’t want my company owning my primary device for personal communication. I would buy a personal smartphone for myself no matter my working condition.

Why are you required to have a phone? May I ask what's your position?

I don't think the BYOD movement is coming from startups. Rather that users want convenience. Spoiled brats like us don't want the company-chosen, business phone, nor do we want two of them (own phone and business phone). Somehow, I feel, though, I'm not representative for the employees in the article.

Startups as you should know, are all about working employees to death. Using your own devices allows you to work for the company anywhere anytime. Work is always a click away if not thrown at you. For instance, the outlook/slack apps will give notifications for new messages, they don't care about you being off hours, they push you to work 24/7.

It's also about costs for small companies. It avoids the company paying and managing the hardware.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com