We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Can work trace yahoo emails ?

Options
13»

Comments

  • tizerbelle
    tizerbelle Posts: 1,921 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Strider590 wrote: »
    They can't prove it

    Employers don't have to prove it - they only need to have a reasonable belief based on the information they do have.
  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Even without proof, her card will be marked.
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
  • Strider590
    Strider590 Posts: 11,874 Forumite
    tizerbelle wrote: »
    Employers don't have to prove it - they only need to have a reasonable belief based on the information they do have.

    Then what? They'd get ripped to shreds in an employment tribunal if they didn't have any proof of a wrong doing. Especially in something IT related.
    “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”

    <><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/
  • tizerbelle
    tizerbelle Posts: 1,921 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    There you go using the proof word again, its not relevant. They don't need the IP address, the writing style including grammar, spelling etc can help identity the sender; other employees could offer a statement about who sent it, has the sender used or given that email address to anyone else? I've been identified previously on another forum using another username by writing style alone.

    The employer could build a substantive case against the email sender without being 100% certain they've got the right person and take action based on that belief.

    If they went for a warning rather than dismissal, then there's no appeal to an ET.

    If dismissed, the employee would have to pay to go to ET and if the employer can show that their belief was reasonable given the information found, the ET would have to accept it, ET's can't substitute their opinion for an employers, they can only judge whether the decision was in a range of reasonable responses.

    As far as ET's go, its not the same burden of proof as with court cases. It's reasonable belief not proof. As someone else posted, even if the employer takes no action but suspects the sender, they may find their working life gets rather uncomfortable.
  • duchy
    duchy Posts: 19,511 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker Xmas Saver!
    edited 24 April 2015 at 11:03AM
    And if she's had the job for less than two years they can simply let her go without needing to give a reason anyway. She's presumably very young to do something so dim in the first place so odds are it's her first job.

    Whichever way you look at it she's marked her own card and the best thing she can do is start looking for a new job. May not be a bad thing as she's so dissatisfied with her manager.......and now that feeling is definitely mutual !
    I Would Rather Climb A Mountain Than Crawl Into A Hole

    MSE Florida wedding .....no problem
  • Her yahoo account doesn't show her ip address or computer name. I found the following article http://www.ghacks.net/2013/11/14/find-email-provider-leaks-ip-address-recipients/ and used the em IP leak link http://emailipleak.com/ to show her yahoo account does not leak anything. Trouble is my outlook em account does leak. Oh well never mind.
  • securityguy
    securityguy Posts: 2,464 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Strider590 wrote: »
    Then what? They'd get ripped to shreds in an employment tribunal if they didn't have any proof of a wrong doing. Especially in something IT related.

    Employment tribunals are civil courts and find on the basis of the balance of probabilities. 51% is enough. They don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt, nor anything remotely close to it. In a criminal court simply waving vague counter-examples ("email is easy to forge") is sufficient to create reasonable doubt; it's not enough to overturn balance of probabilities.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.8K Life & Family
  • 257.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.