By Robert Smithson 

In Auckland, New Zealand a recent news item told the story of Vicki Walker who was fired from her job, in part, because of her “confrontational” emails.  Ms. Walker had apparently made a practice of using block capital letters, bold typeface, and red typeface in emails.

Her employer was reported to have viewed her habits, including her email style, as creating disharmony in the workplace.  Ms. Walker complained to the local Employment Relations Authority, which upheld her complain that she had not been fairly terminated from her employment.

Although the employer’s case against Ms. Walker was unsuccessful, this scenario raises questions about workplace email etiquette.  It is, I think, conceivable that employees and clients alike might be offended by certain uses of available font, highlighting, colour, and other email features.

The reality is that, in many workplaces, email is now the primary form of communication, both internally and externally.  The result is that employees sending emails must be cautious about not just what they communicate but how they communicate it.

No less than in the context of verbal communications, the cues which can be derived from the manner of the communication are important.  Emails seem particularly susceptible to being interpreted in a way which was not intended by the sender.

Are there some guidelines that can be derived from Ms. Walker’s situation and from our own day-to-day email experiences?

I believe the first guideline should be that all employees should think about what they are typing from the perspective of the recipient.  They should focus on how it will be perceived rather than on the intended message.  That will, to some degree, minimize instances of conflict over a perceived (but unintentional) slight.

The next good habit to adopt is, in my view, minimizing the use of capital letters.  I believe it’s now well accepted that using all block capitals is the equivalent of shouting, and NOBODY LIKES TO BE SHOUTED AT (even in print).

The use of different font colours, and the impact those colours might have on recipients, is one factor which I hadn’t considered.  I tend to use either black or dark blue for most email communications, and I can imagine that some people might be offended by the use of certain colours, particularly red.  So, it’s probably a good practice to stick with tried and true business colours such as black and blue.

Another potentially troublesome category is the use of other highlighting methods such as bolding, underlining, and italics.  My view is that these can be very effective for the purpose of refining the sender’s message, but like the other stylistic touches, are probably best used in moderation.

Could an email which uses a large font, underlined, in bolded red be offensive to some people?  Most certainly, because it’s not just the literal content of an email message that’s important.

Notwithstanding the result of Ms. Walker’s case, could such conduct contribute to a finding of just cause for dismissal?  I have no doubt that, in the right circumstances, an employee’s persistent use of inappropriate text formatting in emails could be perceived as misconduct.

So, do yourselves a favour and keep your emails to the basics.  Throw in a little touch of colour or highlighting flair here and there, but do so in small doses.  Remember, what you intend as the message may not be the one the reader receives.

 

Robert Smithson is a partner at Pushor Mitchell LLP in Kelowna practicing exclusively in the area of labour and employment law. For more information about his practice, log onto www.pushormitchell.com. If you have a labour or employment question for him to answer in a future Legal Ease, email him at smithson@pushormitchell.com. This subject matter is provided for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be relied upon as legal advice.