Sports Calendar

“In some circles they like to paint this as a dark, evil invasion of privacy but it is only a weapon against very large abuse by a very small number of people,” he says.

In fact, Mr Christiansen argues, operating a Stasi-like system of cyber-informants is likely to be detrimental to employee morale at a time when talented individuals are extremely scarce and hard to retain.

“As good people are getting increasingly hard to find, they may be unhappy at being spied on,” he says.

The need for monitoring must be balanced against the employee’s right to a certain amount of privacy, says Deborah Clark, the director of public affairs at Liberty.

“The main issue is the right to privacy under the Human Rights Act, which gives the right to receive e-mail without it being intercepted or read by third parties,” she says. “It is important for employees to know where they are - e-mail monitoring should be part of the contractual agreement.”

The need for employers to make it crystal clear what is allowable and what is not is both good management and legally essential under the new legislation, says Diane Sinclair, the employee relations advisor at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

The crucial detail is that although the Act offers specific rights, a much broader area is covered by the code of practice that goes with it.

“The code of practice is important because employers might do something that is lawful under the act but unfair under the code of practice,” she says. “It is a horrible area at the moment with lots of legal strands.”

The Manufacturing Science Finance (MSF) union fears that unfettered e-mail surveillance will give managers dangerous powers over employees, especially in a climate in which swathes of middle management are being filleted out.

Ironically, this “delayering” is being driven by the availability of powerful communications and analysis software that has allowed top managers to supervise workforces much more directly.

“Managers at risk of delayering see those immediately below them as a threat,” warns Peter Skyte of MSF. “It is about trust, when all is said and done, and where that has broken down employees can be harassed and intimidated.”

Union members can also be deterred from contacting their branch officers if they know that their e-mail communications will be read, the MSF has found.

“E-mail monitoring must never be blanket surveillance, and access to the material must be strictly controlled if harassment is to be prevented,” Mr Skyte says.

MSF has developed model workplace agreements on e-mail monitoring that can be downloaded from www.msf-itpa.org.uk

Times Recommends

• Inspirational leadership
• How to get a new job
• The reluctant CEO