Is my employer alowed to access my emails and private personal web space?

• firstly some background. i am in the process of taking my employer to a tribunal for unfair treatment. recently my employer has read all the personal emails i have sent from my work email account and then used the information in one of them to gain access to my personal and private web space. i was using this web space (which i had purposly prevented search engines from accessing), to hold private letters / documents, so i could access them remotely. i gave access to one of the letters to a fellow employee who needed to read one, by way of a link to the specific file in an email. my employer used this emailed link to read the letter, which contained a comment about my employer. and now, unbelievably, they say they are taking me to court for defamation! because i sent the link to a peer, they say that that amounts to publication? are they really alowed to read my email, my snail mail, access my private web space, and then sue me for something i wrote in free speech?

• Answer:

  This sort of issue is the reason we have complicated legal cases; it's not really clear what the (naturally ethical) position would be. Any employer would argue that the working space and facilities they provide to employees, must remain under the employer's control. That would include any information that the employees choose to process via the employer's equipment. Any employee remains a private citizen, and would argue that their own personal time and communications must remain private. This would include personal time necessarily used within the 'defined' working hours, and presumably compensated by informally working 'out of hours' on occasion. There will be legal definitions of 'publication' both set out in legislation (statutes), and established by previous rulings of the tribunals. Your legal representative (or you, if you 'litigate in person') will be involved in a negotiation process to establish what the relevant caselaw and statute precisely mean for your circumstances. Each side will produce laws, or cases, or both, that seem to show that their own interpretation of the rights and wrongs in the case, is the appropriate one. For example, your team might think that ONE PERSON cannot be 'the public', and therefore cannot be 'published' to. If the communication was in any way labelled as confidential, this might (like Prince Charles' Diaries) be relevant, too. The opposition might claim that anybody outside the company IS a member of 'THE public'; if that person is involved in work that might be affected by negative news, rumour, etc about the employer's company, then this might be relevant to the potential EFFECT of defamatory comments. Whichever side can make the most convincing argument, in terms of the statutes and the relevant cases (or can show that their cases are more relevant to the circumstances), will win. However, a great deal of the process is 'horsetrading'. If one side can see that the other side has a strong case (recent statutes, relevant cases), they will be keen to avoid going into the tribunal and being found to be wrong. An employer might claim rights that they don't have, in the belief that you won't or can't challenge them. It has happened before (and worked). Your legal team will be keen to show the employer that they have a strong case in your favour, BUT they will also be careful not to put all the cards on the table too soon. This is a delicate balance, so you should aim to be represented by experienced lawyers if you can possibly manage this. Most trade unions can arrange to support a member's tribunal case.