 |
Web Hosting by Netfirms | Free Domain Names by Netfirms |
|
|
|
Can the Decision Affect Your Company?
An English Tribunal would not be so spiteful as to try to make their decision apply only to me. In paragraph 40 of their decision, the Employment Tribunal wrote
"We would emphasise that we are not saying, as a matter of law, that such a policy can always be justified or cannot give rise to a fundamental breach of contract or destroy the mutual trust and confidence that is essential for the continuation of an employment relationship."
However, there is nothing remarkable about Grattan plc. It is a mail order company, not a nuclear weapons research facility. Random body and mobile ‘phone searches for information were introduced because some employees stole credit card details etc., while working in the call centre. The searching of mobile ‘phone text messages was introduced even though there was no actual proof that any information had been stolen by that method, and in spite of the fact that call centre workers were not even allowed to have mobile ‘phones switched on. [
details]As long as there is even the reasonable possibility that employees could steal information, the case of Trotter v Grattan plc can be cited as a precedent to justify random body and ‘phone searches for information. Your company just has to compare its security needs with those of mail order companies such as Grattan plc.