We support businesses with commercially focused legal solutions that drive growth and protect and preserve your assets and reputations.
Whatever your business, we can help you prosper.
We provide legal support to address the major challenges in life and protect your family and finances.
From relationship breakdowns or personal injuries to property or criminal defence, we can help you achieve the best outcome for you and your family.
The rise of technology combined with the pandemic saw businesses accelerate their use of business mobile phones and instant messaging. Now, it is common to find team members using chat apps or text messages in their everyday work. Employees more so now than ever, are encouraged to use instant messaging platforms to communicate in a work context.
The use of instant messaging is arguably less formal than emails. This can raise questions about standards of conduct and communication with third parties, clients, customers, and colleagues. There are regular stories in the news related to ‘text scandals’ and it arises regularly in an employment law context.
From the Coodes Employment Team, Associate Steph Marsh and Trainee Solicitor Yasin Ahmed, highlight the issues that employers might face when allowing instant messaging in a work context.
There are a number of circumstances in which issues can arise when using business mobile phones or instant messaging. The most common issue is that the messages can be used as evidence or be disclosed which most people don’t consider at the time of sending. For example, messages could be used as evidence to support a claim which can be subject to court proceedings or a tribunal, but the writer may not have wanted them to be made available to others.
In these circumstances, employers must assess how they can get access to the messages. They also need to understand their rights when it comes to seeing the content, which will depend on the circumstances. The first consideration is whether the messaging platform is used for business communications solely. The second, is who owns the device and whether there are any relevant policies in place that govern the use of it.
The immediate answer is that it depends on the specific facts. There are many situations where this may arise but there are 3 practical issues for the employer to consider:
Are the messages accessible? For example, are they subject to encryption or stored on a device with security measures?
Once these have been established, then the approach ultimately depends on the circumstances in which the messages have been requested.
The first step is confirming the messages are accessible and that it is lawful to access in accordance with any policies in place. Secondly, employers need to establish if the messages are held on the employee’s business mobile phone or personal device.
For business mobile phones, instant messages are just like any other business communication system. The employer will then need access to the physical device if it is not stored on a central server. They will also need to consider GDPR which is particularly important where personal information is contained in the messages.
For personal devices, the employer will need the employees’ consent to access the content on their unlocked device, which should be handled with extra precaution and care. In the 2022 case of FKJ v RVT and others, a claim was heard in the High Court in relation to the misuse of private information in respect of WhatsApp messages. The Claimant applied to have the claim dismissed on the basis that the messages the employer had obtained had not been done so legitimately. The Tribunal made it clear that all parties need to consider how they obtain evidence, especially if messages of a personal nature have been collected, stored and used in proceedings.
As established in the case above, employees using instant messaging platforms have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” over their messages and employers need to be careful how they obtain them. This is an area that is developing in case law, where “privacy” is limited or does not apply in certain professions. An example close to home would be the case of BC and others v Chief Constable Police Services of Scotland and Others. This was heard in the Scottish Court of Succession and looked at issues around the right to privacy in messages regarding allegations of sexual offences in the Scottish Police Force. It was unveiled that offensive messages were being exchanged in a group chat between officers. This demonstrated that where the employee is subject to professional standards or is regulated by a governing body, the expectation of privacy is limited.
The practical point to consider here is that a reasonable expectation of privacy can depend on the employee’s role. The content of the information, whether it is necessary to make the request, the volume of messages and how to go about requesting and storing this information will also need to be considered.
Again, the answer here is that it depends. The facts of each case will need to be considered in order to access any messages. As we saw in FKJ v RVT, if messages are private, the employer may not have a right to access them.
The more cooperative the employee is with the access, and if they are willing and happy to share the information, then the easier it will be for the employer. However, employers will still need to err on the side of caution. Ultimately, this depends on the expectation of privacy regarding the messages.
Employers need to consider how they keep copies of messages and records in the event of any future disclosure. Messages that are easily deleted can cause issues down the line if they are not recoverable but at the same time, they cannot store messages and personal information without having a good reason to.
Due to the conversational and less professional nature of instant messages, issues arise around standards of etiquette. In certain circumstances, this is appropriate and necessary, however, employees also need to be careful as this can lead to conduct issues.
Employers need to consider any data protection liabilities. Any monitoring activities could breach the duties of trust and confidence implied in the contract of employment and could give rise to potential claims. Furthermore, employers have a duty to protect the personal data of their employees and other third parties or they could be in breach of GDPR.
If you have any questions regarding this article or employment law in general, you can contact us here or call us on 0800 328 3282.
Head of Employment
Call us on 0800 328 3282, or complete the form below and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
As of 6th April 2024, paternity leave will be changing to reflect a shifting attitude…
What steps should you take if you suspect someone is committing financial abuse as a…