What are your rights when it comes to using your personal devices for work related activities? It’s an issue being argued as part of a federal civil case involving Prudential Insurance and a former employee.
“I feel heavy. I feel overwhelmed, justifiably. And in a lot of stress.”
Stress Jenny Kowalski has felt over the past three years, defending herself in New Haven Federal court. She’s being sued by her former employer, Prudential Insurance, where she worked as a junior level staffer in the Hartford office from 2017 to 2021.
“Upon leaving Prudential for a different opportunity, I was sued and accused of misappropriating Prudential information,” Kowalski said.
Get top local stories in Connecticut delivered to you every morning. Sign up for NBC Connecticut's News Headlines newsletter.
During the legal process, her personal devices like her cell phone was examined through a third-party forensic investigator. Kowalski used her own phone and personal email while working at Prudential, saying many other workers and managers did the same.
“I was trained on the job in a manner that my bosses, my supervisors, my colleagues frequently used their personal phones to text about work, send picture messages or videos about work affairs,” she said.
During that examination, the investigator inadvertently sent files containing sensitive Prudential information to Kowalski’s attorney at the time. Over the course of a few months, an order was crafted by Prudential and Kowalski’s attorneys to have the files deleted. It hit a snag when the investigator requested Kowalski’s username and password to three cloud-based sources: Dropbox, OneDrive, and Google Drive after seeing “possible activity” from the cloud. Kowalski argued it’s an intrusion of her privacy and too vague of a request.
Local
“If you allow someone to go into your computer or to your Facebook account with your username and ID that's going in with your name and likeness. So they're going in as you, that's a really dangerous thing,” she said.
But a judge disagreed, ruling she needed to provide them access to it. Kowalski denies any wrongdoing and continues to fight this order in court.
“A court of law has the capability to order a search warrant or do forensics. But instead, what Prudential is asking for is give us the keys to your house by giving over usernames and passwords,” she said.
In a statement, Prudential says it takes the responsibility of protecting customer and confidential company information seriously and says it has policies in place prohibiting employees from forwarding this information to personal emails. The company went on to say it tried resolving the matter with Kowalski without litigation.
“This matter could have been resolved nearly two years ago if she had complied with court orders that require her to cooperate with a process to identify and delete Prudential’s information. Our primary focus has always been ensuring that Ms. Kowalski no longer has access to Prudential’s information,” the statement read.
Quinnipiac business law professor Anthony Minchella says Kowalski is involved in a unique case and makes decent arguments but faces big hurdles since the court already ruled against her.
“You have to show that there's law that they ignored or that there's some other basis for the order to be dissolved or vacated,” he said.
He says Connecticut has a law, Public Act 15-6, restricting employers from demanding passwords or usernames to personal accounts, but only under certain conditions.
“When you have something that has business and personal on it, that personal becomes accessible in some way by your employer,” Minchella said.
His advice to people starting a new job is to make sure you carefully read anything you sign.
“Read the policies that the company presents to you. Take the time to read them and understand them,” he said.
Kowalski now represents herself pro se, unable to afford lawyers anymore after spending at least $200,000, based on receipts reviewed by NBC Connecticut.
“I'm doing this on principle, but I'm doing it on the law because as individuals we are protected. From boundless, boundless privacy exposure, boundless privacy exposure, we are protected from fishing expeditions,” she said.
She urges any employee to think twice about using their personal devices for work.
“Keep your personal and professional life separate, even if you see others and leaders doing opposite. Because at the end of the day, there needs to be a firm line between what a company owns and what you own,” Kowalski said.
A federal judge ruled on July 30, ordering Kowalski to comply with the court's previous ruling, threatening to hold her in federal custody if she doesn’t.
Kowalski says she intends on continuing to litigate.
