Tag Archives for vicarious-liability

image filtering – the only legal defence against the new UK Harassment law

In a landmark case in 2006 on the subject of bullying in the workplace; the House of Lords have changed the law so as to make employers liable for workplace harassment even if they were not in any way negligent.

The House of Lords decided that the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997 covers the behaviour of employees at work even when the employer has not caused or failed to prevent the offending behaviour. Those employers now have vicarious liability for the acts of employees.

Previously, employees had to prove that the employer was negligent in not stopping bullying taking place and that it had caused them psychological damage.

The new ruling means that companies can be sued even if the company cannot be expected to have known about the bullying, and this ruling is certainly wide enough to include the use of inappropriate image materials as the vehicle for e-bullying.

This decision has serious implications for employers as it gives employees who are bullied or harassed at work a further basis on which to claim compensation from their employers. Moreover, some of the existing limitations and defences will not be available. For example, an employer has a defence under existing discrimination legislation if it can show that it took all reasonably practicable steps to prevent discriminatory harassment occurring – this defence was recently made out where an employer had implemented an effective harassment policy. This would not help an employer facing a claim that it was vicariously liable for an employee’s harassment under the Prevention from Harassment Act 1997.

As we know that harassment takes place in the workplace through the use of pornographic images, it seems that the only avenue forward for employers in avoiding the breadth of this decision is to technologically interdict the harassment and the inappropriate image content employed therein so as to stop it reaching the intended target.

This new law should make employers realise that an effective email and image filtering solution is now a must for any digital workplace and is now the only legal defence in terms of the law and vicarious liability.

Source: image-analyzer.com

Company warning! Email communications added to UK Sexual Offences Act

Changes to UK Sexual Offences Act could mean negligent companies face listing on the registry.

The inclusion of email harassment in the revised UK Sexual Offences Act could open companies up to legal troubles, said an industry insider.

The UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 was recently updated to include “improper use of public communications.” Because of this, a person sending sexually harassing emails could be handed a sexual offences prevention order (SOPO) and therefore be included on the national sex offender registry.

“It really has tremendous implications for any organisation because the widening of the sexual offenders act could mean employers have vicarious liability,” said Ed Macnair, CEO of internet security firm Marshal. “The person sending is prosecutable, but also the organisation.” He cited one case where a London hospital was held liable in a harassment suit involving members of staff and another in the US where an employee’s wife sued her husband’s firm because they facilitated his child pornography habits.

“You don’t want your chief operating officer on the sexual offender registry because somebody in the company did something,” Macnair said.

Source: ITPro

staff bullying, discrimination and harassment

Following the controversy of allegedly racist remarks made on a reality TV show, businesses are being reminded that bullying, whether it is based on race, gender or any other group, is still an issue within UK business.

Although as many as 80% of businesses currently have an anti-bullying policy, more than half of all employees believe it is a problem in their workplace, according to research carried out by business consultancy, Croner.

Along with causing internal conflict within an organisation, businesses that are not seen to deal with discrimination and bullying could suffer damage to their reputation.

Richard Smith, of Croner, said: “Bullying is not only unacceptable on moral grounds, but may, if unchecked or badly handled, create serious problems and costs for an organisation due to poor morale and productivity, and high staff turnover.

“What many employers don’t realise is that they can be held vicariously liable for the bullying behaviour of their staff, even if they have no knowledge of employees’ acts and do not condone them.

“Organisations with a zero tolerance approach as part of a proactive bullying prevention policy are able to deal with the problem most effectively and minimise the risk of claims.

“Employees need to be involved in implementing such a policy, so we would strongly encourage companies to consult with them throughout the process.”

Extracted from : BusinessLink (businessguidence.co.uk)


Other Recent Posts:

  1. Surfing porn can still get you fired - 22nd Jan 2010
  2. 10k inappropriate images found on county council computers - 22nd Jan 2010
  3. ISPs now keep your history for 12 months - 8th Apr 2009
  4. Three Irishmen joke turns into 30 BT Staff... - 24th Feb 2009
  5. Media Interest Increases 15% In Employment Disputes - 24th Feb 2009
  6. Email libel costs £110k for University - 26th Aug 2008
  7. Nearly 50% of UK firms fire abusive emailers - 2nd Jun 2008
  8. Email Compliance and the use of Email Filtering - 31st Dec 2007
  9. Email spam - becoming sound practice! - 7th Nov 2007
  10. Email Security (Encryption) 2007 Review - 2nd Oct 2007
  11. Lost emails cause 5m hours of IT Management time - 25th Sep 2007
  12. Turning your email address into a phone call - 6th Sep 2007
  13. links for 2007-08-21 - 21st Aug 2007
  14. Sitemap - 21st Aug 2007
  15. Trend Micro joins the SaaS team for email protection - 14th Aug 2007