Work Group Chats are popular partly due to the allure of informality. However, many users have succumbed to the mistaken belief that due to this informality, there are no legal consequences to what is exchanged.
Consequently inappropriate behaviour involving work group chats has increasingly embroiled workers, employers, and even government ministers in embarrassing public relations disasters and costly litigation.
Work Group Chats – What Unwary Employers Should Know
So how do you avoid the pitfalls in the workplace?
DO: Include everyone in the Group Chat. The lesson was an expensive lesson for one employer. Mr Brosnan was awarded over £130K at the employment tribunal. Mr Brosnan had been left out of the Work Group Chat as he was ill when it was created. As a result he missed safety critical information circulated in the Work Group Chat. As a result he sustained an industrial injury. Additionally, the judge warned at the tribunal that purposeful exclusion could constitute ‘unfavourable treatment’ under the Equality Act.
DON’T: Allow disrespectful behaviour. The misogynistic terms referring to Derry Police commander Emma Bond were read out during a hearing of her sex discrimination claim. She successfully won her claim and was awarded £31k. Ms Bond was subject to misogynistic abuse in a private Group Chat. In one chat one male colleague said ‘what a f*****g stupid c**t think we all know how she got promoted’.
Similarly, Ms Abdi was subject to racist abuse in another private Group Chat in the case of Ms Abdi vs Deltec International. Ms Abdi, who wears a headscarf, was referred to as a ‘postbox’, ‘terrorist and ‘f****g immigrant’’. One message threatened to ‘rip her headscarf off’, in a private chat that included her direct line manager. In this case, Ms Abdi was awarded £25K, including £20K for injury to feelings.
DO: Respect privacy. In the case of FKJ vs RVT and others, an employee made an employment tribunal claim for sexual harassment. The Respondents cited private messages between the Claimant and her boyfriend and her best friend in defence of the claim. The messages, which numbered over 18 000 over two years. In addition the messages included personal details about the Claimant’s health and sex life. The Respondent claimed to have found the messages on the Claimant’s work laptop following her dismissal. The Claimant claimed her private message were hacked, with the Respondent using them to undermine her claim.
Following the tribunal, the Claimant filed for damages in a misuse of private information claim. The judge in the tribunal case described the use of the messages as a “very serious breach of her private information”. In the subsequent case, damages will be assessed to reflect the Claimant’s loss of control of her private information,her distress and aggravated damages.
What Employers Need to Do
As these recent legal cases highlight, courts do regard informal communication as evidence. Employers should ensure there are policies in place which set out the protocols that apply and ensure all staff are fully conversant with their responsibilities and the conduct that is expected. Ideally undergoing training. Employers should ensure attendance at the training sessions is documented and refresher training is undertaken at regular intervals.