Internet misuse - recent UNISON cases highlight City’s use of “computer misuse” rule

 

Recent disciplinary cases in which UNISON members have decided to resign from their posts rather than risk summary dismissal have highlighted the risk which all City of London employees face under computer misuse rules in the City’s Employee Handbook.

These rules (Section B23) include a loosely worded prescription for the length of time staff can spend on the internet for non-work related use and the disciplinary procedure imposes the overall condition that any infringement of the rules will constitute gross misconduct (Section B7 para 26).

None of the UNISON cases was simply about computer misuse – each also concerned other charges which were serious. However, the single common factor which influenced members in reaching their decision to resign was that, whatever the outcome regarding the other charges, a guilty verdict on the additional charge of computer misuse would automatically bring with it dismissal for gross misconduct.

This is a lethal cocktail. Adding that charge in with any other raises the stakes in a disciplinary case to their highest level. The gross misconduct condition applies, not just to inappropriate content, but also to the length of time someone spends on non-work related connections, all automatically logged by the City’s network and available to managers.

As internet use has become so much a normal part of everyday life, it is predictable that, at any time, when a connection is available, staff will treat it as an easily accessible means of keeping an eye on personal interests, the equivalent of looking at a newspaper, or listening to a radio, except that, crucially, checking an internet link is unobtrusive and may barely disturb work. Nevertheless, remaining logged on to a non-work related internet connection will produce an impressive log of time ostensibly spent not working.

Broaching this concern with managers involved in the UNISON cases has simply brought out an attempt to reassure staff that there is no intention on the part of the departments concerned to conduct a “witch hunt”. However the problem remains and it is very difficult to see a solution to it which will satisfy both sides – the City can hardly remove a limit on personal use and still satisfy an audit on how its staff spend their working hours.

What is required is some qualification of the use to which the time-logs of personal internet use are put in the context of the disciplinary procedure when computer misuse is not the only charge against an individual. That at least might go some way to restoring a level paying field so that staff can consider defending themselves in circumstances such as we have recently seen.

Malcolm Key

Branch Secretary

18th May 2006