Corporations Face Problems with Employee Emails

TwistedOne151 writes "Law.com has an article outlining how the casual attitude of many employees toward work e-mails has resulted in some thorny problems for corporate in-house counsel. 'It has now become routine even in civil investigations for computers to be subpoenaed so lawyers can look at e-mails and hard drives. And one thing always leads to another. "We have forensic software that shows multiple levels of deletions. It shows thought processes. We can learn far more than from just a document alone," said [Scott] Sorrels. "E-mails have taken over the world."'"

Lawyer's advice: be two faced

[QuantumG]

If it's off the record, don't write it. Pick up the phone or better yet, walk over. Don't hit the send button in the heat of anger.

Or here's an idea.. don't be a backstabbing two faced liar. Office politics is one of the many reasons why I am happy to work from home more often than not. If you're getting angry about someone go have it out with them. If you're getting all steamed up about decisions made by others, remember your place, get over it, or stop being so serious - it's just a job.

My personal favorite is the few times I've had to voice concern over the possible legal implications of a particular action. I've had people IM or call me instead of replying to emails because they don't want to be "on the record". To which I have said in the past: "oh, don't you know the IM is logged?" or "You know, if you don't reply to my email and clear this up than all that will be 'on the record' is my concerns and none of your explanations."

Of course, there are people who think its okay to break the law, just so long as no-one finds out about it. To those people I don't send email - I send it direct to the CEO.

Article reads like a 'cry wolf'

[cerberusss]

If you read the article, it talks about the thorny problems that legal people have with e-mail. The following absolutely shocking examples are given:

• catty comments or frankly inappropriate language
• They call people names
• They make inappropriate comments
• "can you believe that [expletive] is complaining about this?"
• "I can't believe she's pregnant at such an inconvenient time at work."

I was like Oh My God, can you imagine the billions and billions of dollars that must be pumped into lawsuits regarding these comments?

Nope, me neither.

Procrastination

[Anonymous Coward]

Never email what you can say over the phone
Never say over the phone what you can say in person

The preferred mode of communication in the modern world is E-mail, the two modes of communication you suggested are actually considered rude these days. I fully understand people's right to have a paper or E-mail trail to cover their ass, but it still gives me a kick to break the unwritten rule that all communication must be by E-mail'. People get so deliciously annoyed because they know they can't go and justify their objections to direct contact, to their bosses, without admitting that most of their insistence on E-mail only communication is mostly just an excuse to make it easier to procrastinate.

Re:Simple Solution

[Cutterman]

Cardinal Richelieu said, "Give me six lines written by the most honest man, and I will find something in them to hang him."

As true now as it was then.

Re:Solution?: Use DRAM SSD for email storage

[REBloomfield]

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/US-ruling-makes-server-RAM-a-document-/0,130061733,339278641,00.htm [zdnet.com.au]

Re:Wait, emails have taken over the world?!

[pimpimpim]

A maffia boss in Italy was caught in 2006, he used small paper notes with (sloppily) encrypted messages [theregister.co.uk] on it to send out orders. Apparently it worked for a long time, and would still have worked if he had used better encryption.

Re:"E-mails have taken over the world"

[Zigmun_Barsac]

"Never complain, never explain and never write anything down." - allegedly Henry Ford

Re:Lawyer's advice: be two faced

[Shajenko42]

Again, IANAL:

yes you can, your bank and credit card company do it all the time - send you notice of change of t's and c's, you could write and refuse, but then essentially you're giving notice of intent to terminate the contract.

You had previously entered into an explicit contract with them (opened an account), and I'm sure somewhere in their terms it says they can change the contract by giving notice. You can make silence the condition of accepting these new changes in your original contract - you can't create a new one by just sending an email with your terms. If you could, spam would be a much bigger problem.

In my example, what you are doing is turning the verbal contract into a written one by putting it in writing, your supplier (bank etc) then has to refute your written version of their contract.

Civil court requires a preponderance of evidence, but you still have to tip the scales to your favor, if just barely. And who do you think has a better understanding of the bank's intentions - you, or an employee of the bank?

In my recollection, written correspondence can be used as proof of a contract only if it is used against the person sending it.

In other words, the bank etc could use it against you, but you couldn't use it against them.