At least for the financial institutions on this list, I can say they have no other choice. Regulation forces them to log everything to avoid insider trading, etc. Any communication outside of their internal systems can't be logged and is therefore a compliance risk.
Been a sackable offence for over a decade in finance, I can not fathom why other sectors have been so slow to enforce some basic standards.
Recording every call, message (and in my office - thing you said at your desk) is mostly used for conflict resolution - when counterparties disagree you go to the tapes and see what was said. From there my word is my bond, it is done.
It provides a right to privacy if the company allows personal messaging services on the device, but I don't think it provides a right to having personal messaging apps on the device(s).
Personally I think it's much cleaner to keep work stuff on your work device(s) and personal stuff on personal devices. The only place that gets sticky is where companies don't provide the device but want you to have work information on it (e.g. mobile phones)
As much as I prefer the European way of some items. I think the American way of treating the work computer as a company asset and just locking it down to an insane degree makes way more sense. Especially for areas like finance.
I've been in a lawsuit with Oracle (as engineer, not direct). And their discovery hit EVERYTHING.
If I used work devices for personal messages, my personal messages would absolutely been in scope.
Or if I used personal devices for work, my personal devices are now in scope. Hell NO!
My work laptop is on my personal network. Its also on its own vlan and can only talk to the imternet, and not fellow devices. And I can attest to that as much if I'm ever called in for a discovery hearing.
Which is actually a good reason for entities subject to GDPR to forbid use of personal messaging apps on work devices... (And to forbid users to use work / official apps for personal messaging.)
What does that even mean? I doubt you can forbid the usage of personal messaging apps except in very exceptional cases (like a court room).
On the other hand: Using personal messaging apps for work related information is a no-go anyway because of confidentiality agreements basically everyone signs.
- Ban ANY use of your personal chats / device at work (eg. your wife texts you to bring milk on the way home)
- Ban WORK communication (eg. My colleague don't understand recent commit I've made)
So the web really isn't explaining how things enforced or what is being done.
I do know of some industries where you put your personal phone when entering specific locations or having stickers on cameras) but here I didn't fully understood the scope.
Using personal messaging apps for work, for example, sending work related messages through WhatsApp or Telegram instead of using the proper corporate/official app.
You can forbid your employees to use non official apps to send work related messages for privacy, compliance, security and other reasons.
I don't understand why they put this up like it's working in their favor. Their website doesn't explain anything extraordinary that makes them different from the average chat app, except that it is europe based.
If anything it is highlighting the pointlessness of any new messaging platform. Companies can and should lock down to the platform that comes with their subscription for everything else - and for all personal matters that is locked down with network effects by sms, whatsapp & wechat.
You could maybe make the case for a federated - email like - messaging service for inter company / party communications. Matrix basically ...
I'm not reading anything in this article that seems to pretend like it's working in their favour?
It's just an article from a company about their industry, companies do that all the time for brand recognition, building trust (showing expertise in their domain), and educating potential customers about why they might need this sort of product (lead generation).
In reality, they don't, not really. The only important differentiator is whether your friends use it and whether you have to self-host a server to use it (which has a large impact upon point 1).
I'm surprised any company allows work to be done over employees personal apps/devices/numbers. If a colleague/boss contacted me about work via my personal number they'd be quickly told to never do it again.
Meanwhile in Spain I use WhatsApp to contact the municipality, the GP uses it to send my blood results and package delivery drivers ask me to share my location. I hate it.
Recording every call, message (and in my office - thing you said at your desk) is mostly used for conflict resolution - when counterparties disagree you go to the tapes and see what was said. From there my word is my bond, it is done.
Personally I think it's much cleaner to keep work stuff on your work device(s) and personal stuff on personal devices. The only place that gets sticky is where companies don't provide the device but want you to have work information on it (e.g. mobile phones)
I've been in a lawsuit with Oracle (as engineer, not direct). And their discovery hit EVERYTHING.
If I used work devices for personal messages, my personal messages would absolutely been in scope.
Or if I used personal devices for work, my personal devices are now in scope. Hell NO!
My work laptop is on my personal network. Its also on its own vlan and can only talk to the imternet, and not fellow devices. And I can attest to that as much if I'm ever called in for a discovery hearing.
Or how about slack, that live in an alternate reality where outlook calndar doesn't exist?
What does that even mean? I doubt you can forbid the usage of personal messaging apps except in very exceptional cases (like a court room).
On the other hand: Using personal messaging apps for work related information is a no-go anyway because of confidentiality agreements basically everyone signs.
- Ban ANY use of your personal chats / device at work (eg. your wife texts you to bring milk on the way home)
- Ban WORK communication (eg. My colleague don't understand recent commit I've made)
So the web really isn't explaining how things enforced or what is being done. I do know of some industries where you put your personal phone when entering specific locations or having stickers on cameras) but here I didn't fully understood the scope.
Now the idea is all banking related stuff is done on approved devices and clients so you can deal with retention(more like deletion) and loss.
And no personal chat clients too. If you're low enough on the pole, you don't even get to keep your personal devices with you.
You can forbid your employees to use non official apps to send work related messages for privacy, compliance, security and other reasons.
You could maybe make the case for a federated - email like - messaging service for inter company / party communications. Matrix basically ...
It's just an article from a company about their industry, companies do that all the time for brand recognition, building trust (showing expertise in their domain), and educating potential customers about why they might need this sort of product (lead generation).
“Take” sounds too threatening.