Private texting debate

Supreme Court agrees to hear an appeal from the Ontario police department after the U.S. 9th Circuit ruled that police officers had a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their texting - even if it was being done on devices supplied by the department. As you might guess, any ruling could have broad ramifications in addressing privacy in the workplace. The Ontario cops sued after their text messages - some of which were sexually explicit - were read by the police chief. From the LAT:

The case has drawn wide interest among privacy advocates. Until the 9th Circuit ruling, most judges had said employers who provide computers, cellphones or texting devices for their workers were entitled to control how those devices were used. Most employers, including the city of Ontario, had a formal policy that said employees did not have a privacy right when they were sending e-mails or other messages. The city told employees it "reserves the right to monitor and log all network activity including e-mail and Internet use, with or without notice."

Privacy argument seems a little shaky. What happens if an employer suspects that one worker is harassing another, and the text messages provide necessary evidence? Also, why couldn't the cops use their own devices instead of the ones owned by the department? Anyone with a pulse should know by now that a workplace computer or messaging system is not private. Nor should it be.