This discussion seems to be getting quite muddled.  We seem to be confusing
what an employer CAN do legally with what she SHOULD do as a good manager.
We also seemed to be confusing the two different, though related issues, of
what a business should do to ensure the smooth running of the business of
the institution and what an employer needs to do to cover herself when
disciplining an employee for misusing company equipment.

Legally an employer can go through any work records or space they want but
most don't. (Who has the time?) However, there may come a time in the course
of the normal business day that you do need to access an employee's or
co-worker's files.  Has no one else but me needed a crucial file or data
from a vacationing colleague to complete a grant report or some other time
sensitive task?  Or how about trying to reconstruct a project completed by
an employee no longer with the museum? Access to records, whatever the
media, in such circumstances is essential. (And don't forget the many ways
our archives and libraries benefit from companies, including our own, with
well organized files with clear and observed retention schedules)

Having policies on computer use that covers accessibility, compatibility,
organization, retention of files, and software issues related to piracy,
viruses, congestion of disk space, and regular back ups would be prudent of
any museum interested in keeping the business running smoothly.  Of course
it would also be prudent for employers to spend the money to purchase enough
licenses of the right software, virus protection, back up software and
hardware, and other stuff to make some of these issues less important.

The issue of misuse of computer equipment such as playing games, sending or
receiving pornographic or racist material, or doing excessive amounts of
personal business is different from the issue of using computers
effectively.  Policies regarding improper use of computer equipment, like
many policies regarding employee conduct, are put in writing in an employee
manual as much to cover an employer's butt if someone needs firing as they
are to provide actual guidance in conduct. For example a policy regarding
punctuality may be lightly enforced. I am often a few minutes late, but my
boss usually overlooks it because I often stay late, take work home, work on
weekends, and am always there in a pinch to help out regardless of what
comp. time or overtime policies dictate.  However, if a person's work
suffers from habitual tardiness, then you must have a written policy
addressing lateness before any formal disciplinary procedure can proceed.
That is, if you want to cover yourself and your company from action if the
procedure eventually leads to termination.

How are you going to a convince a judge or jury that firing a person for a
rule that does not officially exist was NOT the result of racism, gender
bias, or sexual harassment? That's a witness box I don't want to be in.

 A computer example: Like a previous poster I found personal documents on a
museum computer. (at a previous site)  Unlike that poster I opened the files
for three reasons.  1) While I too encouraged employees to use museum
computers in off hours, this hourly employee had clearly done so on museum
time (as evidenced by creation and modification dates of documents), 2) she
did so not on a clerical computer to be found on a employee's desk, but on a
terminal dedicated to educational use by museum visitors.  (Why there was a
word processing program on the thing is still a mystery).  and 3) Her work
was shabby in general and having clear evidence of infractions of a written
policy gave us support when the disciplinary procedures neared the
termination stage.

Now I am no expert on law or human resources.  But everything that I do know
from those experts I have worked with tells me that in order to cover your
company from wrongful termination suits you must have a written employee
manual with clear and reasonable policies, even if those policies are
enforced only when said infractions effect job performance.  99% of
employers and 99% of employees do not need written policies 99% of the time.
Most of us can pretty much agree on what appropriate and effective
professional behavior is most of the time.  But well documented policies and
well documented disciplinary procedures are essential to protect your museum
if it has to fire someone and that person takes legal action.

And let us not forget the liability a company has if an employee were to
commit a crime, or even just do something technically legal but possibly
actionable (such as sexually harass someone or send out racist material,
jokes, or threats via a company's email system) with his computer.  By
having clear, written guidelines against such behavior, the company stands a
much better chance of defending itself against action than if it doesn't.

I do not agree with the poster that having said policies ,and occasionally
enforcing them more strictly due to abuse, punishes everyone for the
transgressions of the few.  I think we can all agree that a good manager
should not create an air of distrust among her staff by randomly snooping in
employee files, electronic or paper. And I agree with Ms. Chamberlain that
an overwhelming majority of museum managers respect that privacy. I also
agree that the vast majority of employees earn that trust by not abusing
computer equipment.  Any employer or employee who betrays the trust of the
other by abusing rights and responsibilities (whether concerning computer's,
telephones, or paper clips) will help to foster an unhealthy work
environment that is counterproductive to the museum's mission.  I am
comfortable saying that 99.9% of the museum profession understands that.
Clear, written policies help protect all parties concerned from capricious
behavior by either side when that .1% poisons an otherwise healthy work
environment.



Matthew White
B&O Railroad Museum
(On his own time on a company computer)