10.2190/WHGJ-AW2B-HW14-AFHN WHGJAW2BHW14AFHN 59 TIMEKEEPING SYSTEMS, INC.: PROTECTING EMPLOYEE EXPRESSION BY E-MAIL UNDER SECTIONS 7 AND 8 OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT 59 64 20030410 20030410 20030410 20030410 WHGJAW2BHW14AFHN.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=WHGJAW2BHW14AFHN 1 SHARLENE A. MCEVOY Fairfield University, Connecticut The protection employees have when they use their employer's electronic mail system has been studied repeatedly in this and many other academic and professional journals. Most of the studies have agreed with a concept put forth in a previous issue of this journal: "While the law is not fully settled, rarely have employee e-mail communications been accorded protection under concepts of privacy" [1, p. 27]. Employees, however, have been discharged over their use of e-mail in the workplace, and this article explores the use of sections 7 and 8 of the National Labor Relations Act as a weapon to protect against such discharges. Timekeeping Systems, Inc., 343 NLRB 244 (1997). Mushroom Transportation Co. v. NLRB, 300 F 2d 683 (3d Cir. 1964). Dreis Krump Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 544 F 2d 320, 329 (7th Cir. 1976); Caterpillar Inc., 321 NLRB 1178 (1996) Postal Service, 241 NLRB 389 (1979) (Letter characterized supervisors as "a-holes."). Harris Corp., 269 NLRB 733 (1984) (Letter described management as "hypocritical despotic and tyrannical found not to disqualify employees from section 7 protection despite a boorish, ill-bred and hostile tone."). Growth Truck and Trailer 281 NLRB 1194, 1195 (1986) (statement to fellow employees called CEO a cheap s.o.b.). All of these statements were considered to be protected activity. B. L. Scott, Employee E-Mail: A Protected Right to Privacy, Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 9:1, pp. 27-38, 2000-2001. Wright Line, 252 NLRB 1083 (1980), enforced 662 F 2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981), approved in NLRB v. Transportation Management Corp., 462 U.S. 393 (1983). M. J. McCarthy, "Your Manager's Policy on Employees: E-Mail May Hit a Weak Spot," Wall Street Journal, Apr. 25, 2000, pp. A1 and A10.