July 3, 2020

Volume X, Number 185

July 02, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

July 01, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

June 30, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

NLRB Upends Legality of Employer Email Policies

On December 11, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued its opinion in Purple Communications, Inc. The NLRB decided employee use of email for statutorily protected communications on nonworking time must presumptively be permitted by employers who have chosen to give employees access to their email systems. The Purple Communications decision overruled the NLRB’s previous decision in Guard Publishing Co. d/b/a Register Guard, which had established an employer may completely prohibit employees from using the employer’s email system for reasons protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), even if they are otherwise permitted access to the system, without demonstrating any business justification, so long as the employer’s ban is not applied discriminatorily.

In Purple Communications, the policy at issue said,

Employees are strictly prohibited from using the computer, internet, voicemail and email systems, and other Company equipment in connection with any of the following activities:

. . .

2. Engaging in activities on behalf of organizations or
persons with no professional or business affiliation with
the Company.

. . .

5. Sending uninvited email of a personal nature.

This policy was challenged as an unlawful violation of employees’ rights to engage in concerted activity as protected by the NLRA. The NLRB discussed the changing nature of work environments, including the increased prevalence of online communications, in deciding to overrule Register Guard. The NLRB held employers must allow employees who have access to company email systems to use those systems during nonworking time for union related activities and other concerted activity protected by the NLRA, unless there are special circumstances. The Purple Communications decision says, however, “we anticipate it will be the rare case where special circumstances justify a total ban on nonwork email use by employees.”

Employers who have policies prohibiting all nonwork use of company email systems should immediately contact employment counsel to evaluate your options. Purple Communications does not require employers to grant employees access to its email system where it has chosen not to do so, and employers are not prohibited from establishing uniform and consistently enforced restrictions, such as prohibiting large attachments or audio/video segments, if the employer can demonstrate they would interfere with the email system’s efficient functioning. Finally, employers should be attentive to future NLRB opinions that might expand the reasoning of Purple Communications to apply outside of the email context, such as to company phone systems or bulletin boards.

© 2020 Poyner Spruill LLP. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume IV, Number 360


About this Author

Kevin M. Ceglowski, Employment and Labor Lawyer, Poyner Spruill, Law Firm

Kevin represents employers in many areas of labor and employment law, including race, age, gender, religion, national original, and disability employment discrimination claims, wrongful discharge claims, and wage and hour claims. He defends clients before administrative agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, and the North Carolina Employment Security Commission, in state and federal courts, and in arbitrations. Kevin also provides guidance to management to ensure employment practices are in full compliance with all...

David L. Woodard, Employment Litigation Attorney, Poyner Spruill, Law firm

David practices in the area of employment litigation.  He regularly advises and defends clients in race, age, disability and sex discrimination and harassment cases; reviews handbooks and termination issues; and provides compliance advice on matters of employment law.

Representative Experience

McNeil v. Scotland County - Obtained summary judgment for employer where plaintiff alleged race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Successfully defended the judgment in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Williams v. City of Fayetteville - Obtained summary judgment on former employee’s claims of retaliation for exercising First Amendment rights, violations of due process, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.