LI Network
Published on: 11 August 2023 at 14:18 IST
The Madras High Court has reaffirmed the right of employees to vent, voice their concerns and grievances regarding management decisions.
The court’s decision came as it dismissed charges against an employee of Tamil Nadu Grama Bank who had posted critical messages on WhatsApp, questioning the bank’s administrative choices.
Justice GR Swaminathan, presiding over the case, underscored the importance of providing employees with a platform to express their opinions.
He emphasized that such expression could serve as a constructive outlet for frustrations within an organization.
However, Justice Swaminathan clarified that management intervention should only occur when the organization’s reputation is genuinely at risk.
He cautioned against stifling these expressions, likening it to imposing thought control.
He also recognized that the principles governing private conversations are pertinent to encrypted digital platforms with limited accessibility in today’s interconnected world.
The legal matter centered on A. Lakshminarayanan, an office assistant at the Arumuganeri branch of Tamil Nadu Grama Bank in Tuticorin. Lakshminarayanan, known for his involvement in trade unions and as an office-bearer in the bank workers’ union, faced disciplinary action due to his critical WhatsApp posts.
He challenged the bank’s decision by approaching the Madurai bench of the high court.
Justice Swaminathan acknowledged that the bank had issued a circular in 2019 to regulate employee behavior on social media. He also raised concerns about potential privacy breaches due to advanced technology such as Pegasus.
While acknowledging the risks, he asserted that charges should not be based solely on information obtained through such means. However, he highlighted the importance of adhering to legal boundaries when sharing content on end-to-end encrypted platforms.
Concluding that the petitioner’s WhatsApp messages did not breach the bank’s conduct regulations, Justice Swaminathan dismissed the charge memo.
Emphasized that private criticisms exchanged informally outside the workplace would not face scrutiny, and the same leniency should be extended to conversations among a restricted group of employees on a virtual platform.
This verdict sets a precedent for respecting employees’ rights to express their opinions while upholding the need for responsible communication within the workplace.