| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ian |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 09:30:10
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/7005703.stm
Some council employees in Wales have been sacked for personal use of the Internet in work time. I hope this isn't the beginning of a change of attitude by employers. It seems to be an unwritten rule at my workplace that as long as you get your job done then it's OK to browse websites for a few minutes at a time.
Although there is an official policy of my employers that t'Internet is provided for work purposes only, generally no one seems to mind if you dive into your personal bank account or keep a news or cricket ticker on your desktop. Some websites like Facebook are Hotmail are blocked, but eBay and many others are let through.
|
| 16 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 22/09/2007 : 11:56:10
So ... if you don't post for a few months we should send a cake with a file in it? |
| FUBAR |
Posted - 22/09/2007 : 11:52:39
Well if I got caught using my mobile phone at work I would get fired straight away, AND could end up in prison for 6 months. No internet at all even on lunch, some people just don't know how lucky they are and end up taking the peace.......
|
| Fluffy Sheep |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 20:43:15
I like Miriam`s post there, comparing a five/ten minute `non-work-related` conversation with colleagues with the equivalent time using the internet in a lull between tasks. That does put this issue into perspective.
I don`t have internet access at work, but there is the hospital Intranet - which I very rarely get to use, on account of all those five/ten minute chats with the very regular visitors...many of these chats are completely un-related to the hospital situation we meet in, but are often a great asset in the bonding process that the patients, staff and visitors derive benefit from. |
| Daveb |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 20:19:30
I think we all agree on this.
The issue raised by Ian is will this make all companies change their attititude.
It depends how big they are and if they are monitoring users.
The company I worked for made rules and set up timed blocks some years back.
It was soon after it was bought by "Stinking Americans" and they are some way ahead of UK.
|
| dom |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 20:11:57
Timed 'sessions' are one solution, but so is warning staff and sacking them if they take the mickey. |
| Daveb |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:43:45
The block is automatically timed. Set up once.
I worked in a company that had this set up.
Rules are simple. A company policy is all that is needed and the staff sign up to it.
If it is am issue within that company.
The odd quick look is not really a problem.
Trouble is the few that abuse the privilage of having free internet access when they should be working.
We go to work to work not to surf.
Companies have every right to block sites.
The union had the neck to blame the council for putting temptation in front of the staff!
|
| dom |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:38:41
To reply to Ian:
The members of staff sacked weren't those who occasionally popped onto eBay. Most companies don't mind staff checking their home email now and again or like you say charging your mobile (my company has the same rule).
The members of staff were on eBay for 2 hours a day. 2 HOURS. That is a quarter of the average person's working day. IMHO that is completely unacceptable.
Most companies trust their staff. Your company sounds the same where they have the rule about electrical appliances and turn a blind eye to people charging their mobile phones, but I suspect if you started bringing in an electric heater, a fridge to keep your drinks cool and a sandwich toaster they would have a word. |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:37:34
quote:
Originally posted by long time no see
Yes it is Common Sense.
If they are Un-Clear of the Rules (due to the Boss not informing them)
then the Boss is at fault.
Excuse me? Why the boss? For pity's sake are we all children that we need to be explicitly told what is and what is not acceptable? We are supposed to be adults with a modicum (at least) of common sense ... apply it for crying out loud!
As for the issue of what is or what is not acceptable and to what extent ... well, look at it as office chat. We all spend a certain amount of time, during working hours, talking about matters that are not work related ... Where did Sandra go to find the perfect place? How did Jim manage to surprise his great-Aunt Doris? My son is really worrying me with his nonchalant attitude to school ... where can I go to get some help ...
We all 'know' the extent to which this happens and we all know what is and what is not reasonable. Apply the same values to internet usage ... If you have been checking the forum during a 5 minute break from data inputting, then do not add a 5 minute break to chat about Rose's new man. If you have spent 10 minutes at the water-fountain forget about checking your personal email account.
Just apply the normal checks and balances. The internet is a new format and it will take time to work out all the various rules of engagement. But banning it is not the answer anymore then blaming the boss for not clarifying matters is. |
| dom |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:34:39
There are thousands of members of staff and all will probably have different lunchbreaks. I think it undermines an IT worker's job to sit there and unblock these sites just for half an hour or something. Plus staff would also want them unblocked for their breaks.
I don't see why a company should be expected to pay for someone to do that just because staff can't just sit there and do some work.
I don't understand why we should blame companies exactly? If eBay was blocked all the time they would be criticised for not trusting their staff. |
| Ian |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:29:58
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder
Every right? Certainly but I think I agree with Dom here. A degree of latitude must be given and a certain amount of trust put in employees ... then, if an employee oversteps the boundaries ... by all means sack the blighter.
quote:
Originally posted by long time no see
Yes it is Common Sense.
If they are Un-Clear of the Rules (due to the Boss not informing them)
then the Boss is at fault.
Yes, but where are the boundaries and what really are the rules?
I'm sure if I were to do the proper thing and ask my manager if it's OK to access this forum, I'd simply be given the company line "Internet access is for work purposes only."
There's a company dress code I never adhere to because nobody else does. I recharge my personal mobile at work, even though there's a rule that we must not connect unauthorised, untested equipment to the work electricity supply. I probably break the rules ten or twenty times a day. There are rules about how I should do my job, but if I followed them to the letter I'd never actually get my job done. |
| Daveb |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:24:11
The techs can take the block off during lunch breaks.
|
| long time no see |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 19:06:30
Yes it is Common Sense.
If they are Un-Clear of the Rules (due to the Boss not informing them)
then the Boss is at fault. |
| Miriam Binder |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 18:48:43
Every right? Certainly but I think I agree with Dom here. A degree of latitude must be given and a certain amount of trust put in employees ... then, if an employee oversteps the boundaries ... by all means sack the blighter. |
| long time no see |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 18:33:41
Yes a Boss has every Right to Sack his workers
if they were told not to use the Internet for personal usage
and they then do.
FACT
Sign Of The Times. |
| dom |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 18:26:55
A few weeks ago a union were calling for sites like Facebook etc to be *unblocked* and now sites like eBay should be blocked? IMHO there is nothing wrong with the company putting trust in the staff to occasionally dip into eBay if there is a lull in the work, but 2 hours on eBay? I'm sure they have been given warnings in the past, but I don't think it is the employer's fault.
I don't think it is a case of sending IT on a training course, it is a case that the council trusted staff and they took the mickey. |
| The Duke of Uranus |
Posted - 21/09/2007 : 10:34:28
quote:
The council, which employs 7,500 staff, had security software in place to prevent access to inappropriate websites such as porn sites but not eBay sites.
I call bollocks, any competent sys admin will know how to add other sites to a content filter. Instead of sacking staff they should be given an official warning and the techs packed off on a few training courses. |
