Office online instant messaging services: The do’s and don’ts

Instant messaging – The do’s and don’ts

March 17, 2016

The “digital water cooler”, where co-workers are able to have informal conversations instantaneously without the worry that their conversations will be saved, is an attractive proposition for many modern workplaces.

There are now plenty on online instant messaging providers who are now offering a mixture of additional features such as the ability to upload images, videos and even voice messages.

Generally speaking, these communications are not recorded on the organisation’s server or backed up.

The absence of a record of those conversations can cause employees to feel that they are able to speak without care and engage in inappropriate conduct which could be considered as harassment (sexual or otherwise), discrimination and/or bullying.

Some handy tips for employers who utilise online instant messaging services in the workplace are:

include protocols for office chat use in a workplace policy making it clear that inappropriate conduct and/or use can lead to disciplinary action;

remind employees that it is incorrect to assume that these chat platforms can be used without the risk of their messages being recorded/saved. For example, someone can take a screen shot of the messages, a photo of the message or even print them out in good old fashioned hard copy or upload them to another social media site such as Facebook.

This cautionary blog is a reminder to employers who provide/use instant messaging to consider regulating the usage of the system and also to employees not to assume that something said in an instant message will not be captured by someone else in another format – even if the system does not make a record itself.

As more communications in the workplace become of the online variety, employers’ policies will need to be agile enough to move with those times to outline acceptable workplace behaviour – in any format.

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

No items found.

Full Federal Court rejects employers bid to quash decision which found employees were not genuinely redundant

Where does it end?

Section 389(2) of Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) provides that a dismissal will not be a case of “genuine redundancy” if it “would have been reasonable in all of the circumstances” for the employee to be redeployed within the employer’s enterprise or the enterprise of an associated entity.

Bullying prosecution leads to conviction and fine for company and its director

I knew you were trouble

Under work health and safety legislation, persons conducting a business or undertaking have duties to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable the health and safety of workers in the workplace. It is also accepted that workplace bullying is a risk to health and safety of workers which needs to be managed as any other health and safety risk.

Victoria records first workplace manslaughter conviction

Various Australian jurisdictions have been slowly introducing an offence of industrial manslaughter, dealing with workplace fatalities that arise as a result of negligent conduct by a person conducting a business or undertaking or its officers.

Resources: Blogs

Instant messaging – The do’s and don’ts