This case arose when Pillsbury Company fired Michael A. Smyth for transmitting inappropriate and unprofessional comments over Pillsbury’s e-mail system. In particular, Smyth made threats related to sales management (he threatened to “kill the backstabbing bastards”) and referred to a holiday party the company had planned as the “Jim Jones Koolaid affair.”37 Pillsbury had repeatedly assured its employees that it would keep all e-mail communications confidential. After his employer read Smyth’s comments, the company fired him.

1. In Case 6-4, the judge carefully chose how to word the issue. Step into Smyth’s shoes and write the issue as he saw it. In other words, if Smyth, through his lawyers, were allowed to state the issue, how would the issue be read?
Clue: Reread the part of the case containing Smyth’s main arguments.
2. Smyth wants the court to look at what happened to him regarding privacy and view any violations as comparable to violations of privacy related to urinalysis and/or personal property searches.Why does the court reject Smyth’s comparison?
Clue: Reread the part of the decision in which the court discusses privacy rights.