Staff AUP

[kennysarmy]

Do staff just need to know where the ICT AUP is or do they need to have signed a copy before you give them a network account?

[fiza]

We get them to sign a paper copy. We also use NetSupport DNA to occasionally bring it up on screen and they have to click 'Accept' before they can login.

[bossman]

We have both electronic (At login) before they can access the network and a paper based one which we keep on file that they have to sign before they're issued with an account....

[elsiegee40]

The acceptable usepolicy should be signed and becomes part of their contract of employment. It's not exactly an onerous requirement.

[TheSysAdminLife]

We've got several policies that require a signature. We're going to bring these together to a single document that signposts these policies and asks for a signature instead when the individual (student, staff, etc) joins or does work on behalf of the school or trust. For existing staff or students we'll get them to re-sign the updated and newly created policies.

 

Not sure what to do about those that don't wish to sign, though. Disable their accounts I guess.

[Oaktech]

Signed, understood and on file before their fingers touch a single piece of school owned electronics.

[Rob_D]

Same as everyone else, signed paper copy and a click through AUP screen before login that I'm sure everyone reads (sarcasm)

[MS2011]

We've got several policies that require a signature. We're going to bring these together to a single document that signposts these policies and asks for a signature instead when the individual (student, staff, etc) joins or does work on behalf of the school or trust. For existing staff or students we'll get them to re-sign the updated and newly created policies.

 

Not sure what to do about those that don't wish to sign, though. Disable their accounts I guess.

 

Would it be possible to have a look your policies?

[kennysarmy]

So I've asked the question here...initial response is:

 

"By being employed staff agree to our policies. We don't want them signing each individual policy."

 

How does that stand legally?

 

Why are you all bothering to get staff to sign anything if you can take this position?

[DrCheese]

Because their contract would state that they agree to abide by all school policies and that may cover them

[Rob_D]

So I've asked the question here...initial response is:

"By being employed staff agree to our policies. We don't want them signing each individual policy."

How does that stand legally?

Why are you all bothering to get staff to sign anything if you can take this position?

 

While you might be covered legally, you do lack an audit trail of the training staff have received which could create loopholes. Especially if you're applying this retroactively (As in, they sign their contract before reading the polices or before the polices were even published).

[kennysarmy]

While you might be covered legally, you do lack an audit trail of the training staff have received which could create loopholes. Especially if you're applying this retroactively (As in, they sign their contract before reading the polices or before the polices were even published).

 

I agree, I've asked if I can see the part in MY contract which states that I will abide by current and future policies.

[pete]

You also need to ensure policy changes are communicated effectively - i.e posting on noticeboards, emailing to staff the new policy with relevant changed sections highlighted, dicussing in staff meetings etc.

 

If Bob in HR is quietly updating policies in a folder somewhere but never announces the changes, it won't work. Especially if someone's being held to account based on a new policy that was never communicated to staff.

[Rob_D]

Wouldn't you also need some sort of documented proof that staff have read/agreed to the updated policies?

[kennysarmy]

Wouldn't you also need some sort of documented proof that staff have read/agreed to the updated policies?

 

Apparently it's "assumed" that if they sign their contract to work here that they "agree" to abide by the policies...

[kennysarmy]

Following my "query!" it was discussed at SMT and this is the outcome...

 

the outcome of our discussion is; All staff - ie teachers and support staff now sign an annual declaration to say that they have read the policies on; safeguarding, child protection, safeguarding and safer working practice, ICT acceptable use, code of conduct staff and Keeping children safe in Education Part 1. By reading them and signing they are read staff are agreeing to abide by them. As an employee of the school all other policies are expected to be followed as well.

[Zammo]

Apparently it's "assumed" that if they sign their contract to work here that they "agree" to abide by the policies...

 

In fairness there are many policies across my Schools / Trust that I have not signed to indicate my agreement with. Only 2 or 3 actually require signatures, so I can see why an AUP might not need to be signed any more than say the behaviour policy, whistle blowing policy or school closure policy for example

[msi_school]

It is "reasonable" to assume that a member of staff agrees to the school policies or will raise a complaint in a "reasonable" amount of time in the same way it is "reasonable" to issue contract changes and assume the member staff agrees if they don't disagree in a "reasonable" amount of time.

 

It is not "reasonable" to assume that a member of staff will keep themselves up to date with the policies without being made aware they have been changed and there is even precedent that a member of staff may "reasonably" forget parts of policies if they are not "regularly" reminded of the terms.

 

It is also not "reasonable" to have a click through AUP that looks like and EULA but you don't need all the terms just the bullet points, if you give the location of the whole document.

 

I had to do a lot of research on this at a previous job before I could add a click through AUP, I have put some terms in quotes above because I am using the legal definition of the term not the human one.

 

TLDR your employer can assume you agree to policies but they have to tell you when they change.

Edited February 27, 2019 by msi_school
Spelling

[pete]

^ Which is why your bank (for example) always tells you the gist of changes to any terms of conditions in the body of the email. Sticking it on a website and not telling anyone won't hold up in court.