State Supreme Court Rules on Private Emails
I strongly disagree with this ruling.
The state Supreme Court ruled Friday that Wisconsin government employees personal emails are private, even if they are sent from a work computer. The ruling came as a result of a case where five Wisconsin Rapids school teachers were ordered to turn over their private email messages. A lower court ruled that the order was just, however, this latest development by the Supreme Court overturns that.
Anything that takes place on a government computer is a public record subject to open records laws except for the limited exceptions already defined (HR info, etc.). It’s no different than everything that takes place on my work computer is subject to inspection by my boss. In this case, the citizens are the bosses and have every right to see what’s taking place on their office computers.
Furthermore, who, exactly, gets to decide what’s private? The person who wrote the email? Some faceless administrator? Is their any way to dispute such a classification? Not only is this a bad ruling, it’s an impossible policy to implement.
Implementing this won’t be any more subjective than any of the other exceptions already made. However, with the vast proliferation of web-based email access, texting, etc., I just don’t know why any state employee would bother to use a state email account for personal stuff beyond “hey, wanna get lunch?”
Personally, I tend to support anything that pisses off the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, just because.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 16, 2010 at 2145 hrs
No personal business of any type should be conducted using taxpayer owned resources. None. How can something that you created using publicly owned computers be considered “personal”?
This leaves a dangerous grey area that dishonest government officials will use to hide their activities. Bad move…. very bad move.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 17, 2010 at 0700 hrs
No personal business of any type should be conducted using taxpayer owned resources.
So, no gov’t employee should ever call home, or a day care, or a school, or the pharmacy, from the phone at their desk. They should never check the weather report on their computer to see how the commute home will be like. Got it. thanks!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 17, 2010 at 0746 hrs
How can something that you created using publicly owned computers be considered “personal”?
What does the ownership of the equipment have to do with whether something is considered “personal”?
The case and rulings—if you actually took the time to read them—hinge on whether personal messages (which are allowed in limited amounts) on gov’t computers are considered a “record” subject to the Open Records Law. Public/private isn’t part of the issue at hand.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 17, 2010 at 0814 hrs
Hello dearest, what would you like for dinner tonight? I’m thinking either a pot roast and spaghetti.
The $20 million dollars to build ovens to throw the jews in to is being deposited by the end of the day.
I got the cutest outfit the other day. I’m a pink sequined top with white pants. I got them at Kohls.
See ya later,
Some Government Employee
***This message is obviously personal and cannot be read by the public in an open records request! Ever!
Posted by Jay4Liberty on July 17, 2010 at 0830 hrs
Hi sweetie, I’ll pick up a loaf of bread and some milk on the way home, k?
Vote for John Smith for Assembly—he’s your guy! He’ll be holding a fundraiser and meet ‘n greet on Tuesday at Joe’s Bar and Grill starting at 7:00 p.m.
Target’s having a great sale on school supplies this week—glue sticks are 10 cents each!
Cya!
Some Government Employee
**Also a personal message.
Posted by hsgbdmama on July 17, 2010 at 1024 hrs
Interestingly, the messages in #s 5 and 6 above would be considered public records without their second paragraphs. Why? ASOL would have them outlawed. Why?
Posted by Mike on July 17, 2010 at 1419 hrs
DID ANY OF YOU READ THE ACTUAL OPINION???? Given the text of those messages, they WOULD DEFINITELY BE CONSIDERED RECORDS and subject to the open records laws.
The ruling didn’t say that ANY presense of ANY personal content would deem the entire message personal and exempt.
J.H.C.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 17, 2010 at 1640 hrs
From the article:
other justices “cautioned that the ruling will provide a blanket exception for government workers to sidestep the open records law simply by claiming their e-mails are personal.”
It sounds like this isn’t the end of it.
Posted by hsgbdmama on July 17, 2010 at 1711 hrs
Here’s some food for thought. Every time you call any government office, would you like to listen to this preamble, “This call may be recorded for … “ like some businesses have? Should every phone call made to or from any government phone (not just 911) be recorded so it to can be subject to open record laws? Should every conversation that takes place inside a government building with any government employee also be recorded? If not, why?
Why are emails “so holy” but not phone calls, etc? Why do you care that everything done with a computer is “on the record” but not other communication? Record everything?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 17, 2010 at 1758 hrs
other justices “cautioned that the ruling will provide a blanket exception for government workers to sidestep the open records law simply by claiming their e-mails are personal.”
I guess some people need to take the remedial reading comprehension course again.
We all know that government people always do exactly what is written and never try to get away with doing something that would be against those same written words. Nothing to worry about here, move along and watch some American Idol.
Posted by Jay4Liberty on July 17, 2010 at 1951 hrs
Why are emails “so holy” but not phone calls, etc?
because people let their guard down on emails, often not remembering they are subject to (GAMazy’s) frivolous open record requests
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 18, 2010 at 2151 hrs
This is a tough one. I don’t know a single person who doesn’t use their work environment - computer, phone, office space, etc. - for personal reasons on occasion. Heck, we all have pictures of our families on our desks. This is just an extension of that.
We seem to equate “personal” with “lazy” and therefore discourage it with government employees. Yet many of these same employees are logging into work accounts from personal home computers at night, using personal cell phones for business use, etc. If you’re going to expect people to work on what would otherwise be personal time, you have to expect them to find personal time during standard working hours.
Posted by Joey on July 19, 2010 at 1000 hrs
I wonder how many government IP addresses appear in the logs of this very blog.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 1033 hrs
I don’t know a single person who doesn’t use their work environment - computer, phone, office space, etc. - for personal reasons on occasion.
Correct—but with work equipment, there is usually no expectation of privacy. Companies which my husband and I have worked at state that our emails are company property if they are done using employer-owned resources.
There is a reasonable amount of personal business you can take care of at work (i.e., talking to the daycare center, school, touching base with significant other), it’s just when it gets abused is when it becomes a problem.
Posted by hsgbdmama on July 19, 2010 at 1227 hrs
I don’t know a single person who doesn’t use their work environment - computer, phone, office space, etc. - for personal reasons on occasion.
That would be at the discretion of their private employer. I know private companies that would fire you for misuse of company property if you surfed the web or made private calls on the company cell phone. There is no reasonable expectation on your part that the company owes you the use of it’s resources for your own business… nor should you expect any level of privacy when doing so.
I wonder how many government IP addresses appear in the logs of this very blog.
So George, I assume you were then outraged by the firing of the Scott Walker aid who was using government resources to make private and personal commentary on blogs?
So, no gov’t employee should ever call home, or a day care, or a school, or the pharmacy, from the phone at their desk. They should never check the weather report on their computer to see how the commute home will be like.
No, they shouldn’t unless there is some rule allowing them to. They should certainly expect no privacy when they are using my computer or the phone line that I provide for them. It’s not theirs… why would they assume that private use of those items is their right?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 1241 hrs
So George, I assume you were then outraged by the firing of the Scott Walker aid who was using government resources to make private and personal commentary on blogs?
On what basis do you make this presumption?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 1311 hrs
And while I don’t know the facts of the case other than what you’re summarized, if a government worker uses government resources to make private and personal commentary on blogs, that is likely in violation of the acceptable use policy in place at the government agency, and suitable discipline is to be accepted.
In this case, the severity likely depends on the amount of time spent, the nature of the blogs & comments left by the individual, and that individual’s rank.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 1401 hrs
By the theories of absolutists like the WNA, post-it notes that say “eye appt. 2:30” and “pick up milk from store” are public records of their own accord, and by their extremist logic, state employees are breaking the law when disposing of such notes or permanently relocating them from state property. Apparently employees should be archiving those somehow and shipping them off to the State Historical Society to be preserved in perpetuity. Maybe agency employees can relabel trash cans as “archival files” and we can send it all to the WHS for analysis. I’m sure that given their limited space they’d be very interested in additional piles of used legal pads and discarded phone messages.
The majority opinion and the Gableman concurrence make a lot of sense. Email should be held to the same standards as any other printed document. Just because it’s infinitely easier to save and archive than legal pads and post-it notes doesn’t mean the public is any more entitled to see it. And just because taxpayers own the paper and the pen doesn’t mean they automatically own the contents of the note that’s written.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 19, 2010 at 1434 hrs
Total Entries: 20001
Total Comments: 134057
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 03:10 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 02:38 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 113
Total anonymous users: 2
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 04:05 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).