Opening employee mail

[blink401]

What is the name of your state? MN

Hello,

I have read articles and threads on this forum and elsewhere concerning this topic and there is great variance from one to the other about weather or not it is legal for an employer to open an employee’s mail.

US Code 18 U.S.C. 1702 makes it clear that diverting, opening or knowingly reading someone else’s mail before final delivery without permission is a violation of the law.

I am interested in any case law or Postal/Federal law that contradicts US Code 18 U.S.C. 1702 or says specifically that employers have the right to open or screen employees mail before delivery.

Your help is appreciated.

 

[mlp's mom]

You do realize that the mail you are referring to (delivered to the company) is the company's mail and once it reaches the company it has made it's final destination. It is up to the company to deal with the mail as they see fit.

 

[cbg]

And that if the employee doesn't want his/her personal mail opened by someone else at the company, the perfect way to resolve the situation is to have his/her personal mail sent to them at home, not at work. If it's sent to the company, it's considered to belong to the company and can be opened as such.

 

[blink401]

Of course I would agree if a letter is addressed solely to a company. And I might even agree if the mail is addressed with the employee’s name and employer’s name.

Sec 1702 is clear in stating: Whoever takes any letter that has been in any post office or the custody of any letter or mail carrier before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed with intent to open, destroy, or to pry into the business of another shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

“Before it has been delivered to the person” doesn’t imply that it is fair game once it has been delivered to the address specified.

If I receive a letter at my residence with or without a specified name, does that mean in both cases that my wife, kids, roommate or anyone else who may reside in the house can open and read this mail?

How about if I receive a letter addressed to my residence with my neighbors name on it, does that make the letter mine to open and discard as I please?

Maybe a more accurate analogy would be, if a friend has moved into my house, does that make his mail mine to discard, or open and screen before final delivery because I am the property owner?

In any case Sec 1702 doesn’t imply in any way that the land or property owner of the final destination, or a person designated by the property owner becomes the owner of all incoming mail or may open and inspect this mail regardless of addressee.

You two, along with some others believe that once a letter has been received by an employer from the post office it then belongs to the employer. I have to assume you have reasons to believe that, and I would appreciate it if you would point me to the source of your information.

I appreciate your responses.

 

[Ramoth]

Several courts have interpreted the legislation as drawing a distinction between "misaddressed" and "misdelivered" mail, holding that where the sender places the name of a third person on the envelope but uses the defendant's address, the item ceases to be "mail matter" once it has been delivered to the place listed on the envelope, even if the addressee is not at that address. See, e.g., United States v. Lavin, 567 F.2d 579, 581 n.6 (3d Cir. 1977); United States v. Anton, 547 F.2d 493, 495 (9th Cir. 1976); and United States v. Davis, 461 F.2d 83, 88-89 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 921 (1972). Under that view, although it is permissible to prosecute a defendant for stealing from a letter addressed to another location that has been misdelivered to the defendant's address, a defendant cannot be prosecuted for stealing from an envelope that contains the defendant's address, even if a third party is the named addressee.


Give me a sec to re-track the source for this and I'll be right back with it...


US vs Fox, which was an appeal for a Court Martial. The quote refers to stealing from an envelope because the defendant was charged with taking a check from an envelope that was delivered to her house, but did not have her name on it.

 

[cncman]

Again with the mail opening...

State=WA

Having read enough to realize the my employer CAN open my mail, whether personal or otherwise at work, let me add another wrinkle. I pretty regularly order merchandise on the web and otherwise and have it delivered to work as I can guarantee my being there to receive it as opposed to sitting on my porch for hours, subject to theft. The GM suddenly decided that all (key word) mail is to be opened before hitting the 'in boxes' for distribution. This includes USPS small boxes, etc. The problem is, this is selective. HIS mail is not opened, nor the president, nor the vice president, etc. I find it very irksome that:

1) Mail clearly innocuous and intended for me is being opened.
2) This policy (though not written) is being selectively enforced.

He has never clearly stated his intent behind this practice. If pressured, I'm sure he would claim 'security' and 'anthrax threat' like reasons. Personally, I don't like, but could live with the opening part... but the selective part has me a bit bugged. Any ideas on legality, discrimination, etc...??

P.S. First posting here. Great site with a lot of helpful information

Addendum: After spending a few more hours here reading, I am now painfully aware that this practice, though irksome, is but a small twitch on the Richter Scale of employer injustice. It certainly contrasts with the 'warm-n-fuzzy' family environment the company prides itself on. Rapid growth has brought with it protectionist change on the part of management. In my book, a little trust goes a long way. I guess I'll just have to look for it elsewhere...

 

[cbg]

Just as an FYI, a lot of responders will not answer a post that has "hijacked" another thread. If you wish an answer to any question, it is best to open your own thread rather than to attach a question to someone else's.

 

[cncman]

My apologies. As a member of other forums, the term 'hijacking' takes a bit different slant. Rather than ask the same question(s) over and over in different threads, I supplimented this one as it was the same topic. I will adjust my tactics in the future.