Workplace internet access is invaluable for employees to perform their work responsibilities in the most efficient and effective way. Responsibilities such as competition research, new opportunity identification, and keeping abreast of relevant industry and political environments, cannot be effectively accomplished without providing employee internet and email access. While these accesses are imperative for businesses to remain competitive, employee internet and email access pose liability risks, therefore employers have valid concerns regarding legal, ethical, and human resource issue repercussions that the company might face concerning employee internet abuse. For these reasons, we propose taking preventative measures by implementing two
…show more content…
Lau and Johnson (2014a) explain that “a tort is any legally recognizable injury arising from the conduct or non-conduct . . . of persons or corporations” (para.3). Regardless of intent, the tort system attempts to make the injured party whole when individuals breach this duty of reasonable care; and employers can be held accountable for their employees’ torts by way of the respondeat superior doctrine. Respondeat superior, a type of vicarious liability, arranges for the employer’s responsibility of its agents, i.e. its employees (Hill & Hill, 2017, para.1). Because the internet provides immediate connections to vast populations of people, when employers provide this access to their employees, they can be held accountable for their employees’ injurious acts on this population, therefore they must ensure their employees act with reasonable standards of …show more content…
Moreover, even if the internet misuse only benefits the employee, vicarious employer liability can apply because contemporary awareness deems internet misuse foreseeable. Hence, specific “employer knowledge of the conduct may not be required to impose liability” (Tucker Law Group, 2011, para.5). To limit liability, employers should take measures to become knowledgeable in effort to prevent or halt injurious and criminal behavior. Totten (2004) asserts that employers have a duty of care to take preventative measures to hinder employees’ injurious internet use activity. Because misuse is foreseeable, an employer duty of care exists in policy making to monitor employees’ internet and email activities for such
Lau and Johnson (2014a) explain that “a tort is any legally recognizable injury arising from the conduct or non-conduct . . . of persons or corporations” (para.3). Regardless of intent, the tort system attempts to make the injured party whole when individuals breach this duty of reasonable care; and employers can be held accountable for their employees’ torts by way of the respondeat superior doctrine. Respondeat superior, a type of vicarious liability, arranges for the employer’s responsibility of its agents, i.e. its employees (Hill & Hill, 2017, para.1). Because the internet provides immediate connections to vast populations of people, when employers provide this access to their employees, they can be held accountable for their employees’ injurious acts on this population, therefore they must ensure their employees act with reasonable standards of …show more content…
Moreover, even if the internet misuse only benefits the employee, vicarious employer liability can apply because contemporary awareness deems internet misuse foreseeable. Hence, specific “employer knowledge of the conduct may not be required to impose liability” (Tucker Law Group, 2011, para.5). To limit liability, employers should take measures to become knowledgeable in effort to prevent or halt injurious and criminal behavior. Totten (2004) asserts that employers have a duty of care to take preventative measures to hinder employees’ injurious internet use activity. Because misuse is foreseeable, an employer duty of care exists in policy making to monitor employees’ internet and email activities for such