Spam Cost Companies $874 Per Employee

July 1, 2003 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - While a can of Spam will run you $1 at the local supermarket, the annual per employee cost to your company is approximately 874 times greater.

When the average employee receives nearly 3,500 spam messages per year, it is little wonder that so much resources are being spent by companies trying to combat the problem. In fact, in 2003, the average lost productivity per year per employee is 1.4% due to the onslaught of spam, according to Nucleus Research’s “Spam: The Silent ROI Killer” report.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

Companies have not been oblivious to the problem, with an average of one full-time IT staff person required for every 690 employees – just to manage spam and spam-related issues. However, the efforts are not without their flaws, as Nucleus’ research indicates companywide spam filters only reduce employee productivity loss by 26%.

“Companies have been quick to recognize the technology costs of spam but have been slow to understand the impact spam can have on worker productivity,” said Rebecca Wettemann, VP of Research of Nucleus Research. “The survey shows spam is slowly eroding the productivity of employees and the loss is only growing. Organizations need to recognize spam as a significant ROI factor and address this issue through spam filters and possibly with litigation. Given the current trend, one can see the day where spam materially impacts the productivity of many corporations.”

For this report, Nucleus conducted in-depth interviews with 117 employees at 76 different US companies, along with 28 IT administrators responsible for managing e-mail and other corporate applications. The full report can be obtained at www.NucleusResearch.com .

Court: Intel Spammer Didn't Trespass

June 30, 2003 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - The California Supreme Court handed an ex-Intel worker a victory in his six-year legal dispute with the technology giant over 30,000 e-mails he sent critical of his former employer to staffers at work.

>In a four to three decision, the state high court found that California’s trespass law requires evidence of damages, which wasn’t present in the case against former Intel employee Ken Hamidi, according to a report on CNET News.com.

“After reviewing the decisions analyzing unauthorized electronic contact with computer systems as potential trespasses to chattels, we conclude that under California law the tort does not encompass, and should not be extended to encompass, an electronic communication that neither damages the recipient computer system nor impairs its functioning,” the court wrote.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

>In March, Intel had asked the California Supreme Court to uphold an earlier legal ruling that found Hamidi had trespassed on its servers by sending thousands of unwanted e-mails to staff at work, dating back to 1996. The servers were private property, the company argued.   Hamidi, who charged unfair labor practices at the chip giant in the e-mails after his 1995 dismissal, contended that he had the right to express his opinions based on the First Amendment (See  CA Supreme Court Deciding E-mail Spam Free Speech Case). 

>Chuck Mulloy, an Intel spokesman, said the company was “disappointed in the court’s decision. We’re studying the opinion to assess our options in the event that Hamidi resumes spamming against Intel,” according to CNET News.com.

As with many free speech issues, the case generated widespread interest.  On the side of Intel, eight friend of the court petitions were filed, including the US Chamber of Commerce and eBay Inc.  However, to Hamidi’s support have come the American Civil Liberties Union and the Service Employees International Union.

«