: - (Big Brother is reading your e-mails

It takes only seconds for your boss to get a copy of every email whizzing in and out of your e-mail account. While it may not be quite the stuff of Orwell's 1984 nightmare, we are all, to some extent, under the gaze of Big Brother.

In most companies, e-mails are routed through a central server. Even if your company doesn't have specialised surveillance software, your IT administrator can read every e-mail you send or receive - before you have even read it yourself.

E-mail-monitoring software is becoming more sophisticated. Earlier versions of surveillance software merely scanned for keywords such as joke, porn, sex, or CV in the subject box. Now, cyber-smart software such as Ascentor, which was launched in the UK last year, can evaluate the context of e-mail messages and whether they comply with company policy.

With Irish companies becoming more fearful of their staff using company e-mail to whittle away working hours chatting to friends or, in more extreme circumstances, passing confidential or defamatory information outside the company, they are seeking new ways to copper-fasten their security.

One of the companies to tap into this trend is Softech Telecom, which last year launched Ringmaster IMS. According to John Doris, product manager for Ringmaster IMS in Ireland, this Internet surveillance package allows companies to pinpoint excessive or inappropriate use of office tools by employees.

"Ringmaster IMS tells you the source, destination and volume of e-mail traffic. And if you wanted to monitor staff activity on the Internet, every website accessed, every file transferred or received from that particular website could be recorded," he says.

One of the key sticking points in the e-mail surveillance debate is that there is no legislation in place requiring employers to inform their staff that mail is being intercepted. Donncha O'Connell, director of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) believes all companies have a duty to their workforce in letting them know if their actions are being observed.

"Secretly monitoring staff is a form of entrapment and is completely objectionable," he says. "There is a clear need for some form of comprehensive statute on privacy. All we have at the moment is a loose constitution that guarantees a right to privacy, the parameters of which are unclear."

In the UK, the Human Rights Act, to be enacted next month, provides that employers must notify staff if they intend to monitor e-mail.

The chief executive officer of the Irish Internet Association, Frank Cronin, believes the introduction of a regulatory framework could deter staff from abusing company communication tools.

"If people know their e-mail usage is being monitored, they are far less likely to abuse the system. One of the real issues here is that there is no real case law in Ireland. Sooner or later legislation will be required and this will most likely arise from a court case which has gone sour.

"Because e-mail is so informal, people don't really realise that if they send a joke to someone in their office or in another organisation it might offend the user. An insulting e-mail can be cited in an office harassment or libel case."

In 1997, Norwich Union UK was forced to pay out £450,000 in damages and costs to Western Provident Association (WPA) after the rival company was libelled in an internal e-mail circulated by Norwich Union staff. WPA's chief executive Julian Stainton said after the settlement: "People regard electronic mail as a transient medium in that the message disappears into the ether. The reality is that everything you type and send is recorded almost for all time and is available to be re-assembled at a later date."

While Ireland has seen relatively few unfair dismissal cases over e-mail abuse, this could soon change as numbers accessing the Internet in work continue to rise. According to Amarach Consulting's latest Consumer TrendWatch report, the number of Irish adults using the Internet has risen to 679,000. The largest increase has occurred in the workplace with 10 per cent of respondents now accessing the Internet during work hours.

As Internet usage increases in the US and Europe, the number of sackings for the abuse of company e-mail and Internet policy has risen accordingly. In December 1999, 23 workers from the New York Times accounting department in Virginia were sent packing for distributing e-mails which were deemed "inappropriate and offensive".

In June of last year, Cheshire IT manager Lois Franxhi lost her claim for unfair dismissal after she was fired for using company time to search for a holiday online. The lack of Internet usage policy within Irish companies has culminated in confusion between management and staff as to what level of Internet and e-mail usage is acceptable. In August, Michelle Mulvany was awarded £3,000 by an employment appeals tribunal after being sacked by leading computer company Compaq for using her company e-mail and mobile phone accounts to establish and maintain an online listings magazine. Her activities were uncovered after the company decided to download her e-mails. The tribunal accepted Mulvany had misused company property but ruled that she had not received adequate warning before her dismissal.

Barbara Kelly, acting media affairs officer with SIPTU believes that more "common sense and communication" in employer-employee relations could help alleviate possible confusion about what constitutes Internet and email abuse.

"New recruits and existing staff should be advised if an employer is planning to introduce a surveillance policy," she says. "They should be asked to sign some kind of declaration or contract to ensure they understand the rules and regulations." "I don't see why companies should have a problem with a limited amount of personal emails so long as it doesn't interfere with an employee's work. After all, most e-mails take less time than a personal phone call."

Some e-mails, however, especially those with bulky files or graphics, take longer to send or download than a personal call. These can cause logjams within a network. E-mail surveillance can counter this problem by helping companies manage bandwidth and sustain high productivity. Staff who spend time online (otherwise known as cyber-slackers) are not only running up substantial online expenses, but also squandering company time. According to a survey conducted by Prof Helen Petric of England's Hertfordshire University only 1.8 per cent of respondents claimed to use office e-mail purely for legitimate company business.

"Consider the productivity issue," says Simon Stewart, technical director of Softech Telecom, "where a $30,000 employee wastes an hour a day on Internet browsing, chatting or answering personal e-mail. The cost impact to the company is $3,600 per annum, with over a month's work undone per year."

According to one Dublin-based software company, the monitoring of staff e-mails is becoming standard practice in larger firms. Rory Caren, communications manager with IBM, explains that, although many companies including IBM would not have specific surveillance software, they would check an employee's email "if misuse was suspected". Siemens IT administrator, Gavin Fearon, confirms that the company uses e-mail monitoring software to uphold security and to check for viruses.

As e-mail surveillance increases, more Irish companies are issuing employment contracts with inbuilt e-mail and Internet clauses. Your boss, however, is still under no obligation to tell you if you're being watched.