Question 1

Concerned about what its employees post online,Big Box Retail Inc.monitors the employees' use of social media.Carl,a Big Box employee,files a suit against his employer,alleging that the monitoring is an invasion of privacy.The court will most likely rule in Big Box's favor if

A)Big Box can show a reasonable need for social media monitoring.
B)Carl has no expectation of privacy on the monitored site.
C)Carl is part of a protected class.
D)the monitoring is a fishing expedition.

B

Accepted Answer

B

Question 2

During litigation over an employment situation between Park & Ride,LLC and its employee Quent,Park & Ride asks the court for access to Quent's complete social media records.The court is most likely to grant access if

A)Park & Ride can show a reasonable need for social media evidence.
B)Quent has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the records.
C)Quent is not part of a protected class.
D)the request is a fishing expedition.

A

Accepted Answer

In order to gain access to Quent's complete social media records, Park & Ride would need to show a reasonable need for the evidence, such as if the social media activity is directly relevant to the case or if it could potentially provide evidence that would be beneficial to their defense. A fishing expedition, where there is no specific reason for requesting the records, would not be sufficient cause for the court to grant access. Quent's expectation of privacy may also be a factor, but it would depend on the specifics of the case and the content of the social media records in question. The fact that Quent is or is not part of a protected class would not necessarily come into play when determining if the request for access to social media records is reasonable or justified.

Deck 35: Digital Update: Monitoring Employees’ Social Media right or Wrong?