Whew! Rock and a hard place.

[thecomputerguy]

I have a legal client who is the primary Lawyer at his law firm where he practices insurance law. He has a couple employees and his Wife who works with him who I can assume would be considered co-owner, even though his name is on the Law Firm. The Lawyer is an extremely dry, very stern, former military Lawyer. If I hadn't known him for 10 years now I'd be terrified of him. His Wife does odds and ends, pays bills, does miscellaneous paperwork, random bookkeeping, and runs their house.

Years back when they were much larger she had me install the Server/Workstation version of SpectorCNE which is just a workstation monitoring program. Essentially the way they use it is the program takes a screen shot of what their employees are doing every 1s in black and white. You'd think this would take a ton of storage but it actually doesn't. I installed it on all of the computers and went on my way. One day the Lawyer found out, probably through me, that this program was also in his computer. We sat down and he told me very directly that he wanted it off his system, and it was to never be reinstalled, I obliged and removed it and everything was fine, he wasn't mad at me at all, it wasn't my call to put it there in the first place.

Moving on...

Somehow she figured out that not only could she fire people who were messing around on company time but she could also rebuild data in the event that someone lost something i.e. not saving a document when closing, mainly live data that wasn't recorded, they do have backups for data that actually gets properly saved. So in recent years they've gotten rid of most of their employees and the ones left don't mess around so she'll occasionally use it to rebuild data that someone messed up on by watching a black and white semi-video of them working.

Today she emailed me and said that her husband has complained to her that he lost some data and she said that if Spector was in his system she could have retrieved the information and that she was making a "Vice-Executive Order" to have me reinstall it in his system without him knowing.

I know the right thing to do is to make sure they are both in agreement of having it installed but...wow... talk about putting me in a tough spot.

 

[Mytechid]

The best advice I could give you is, to be honest.

Let them both know that whatever they got going on here is making you uncomfortable, and it's not cool. In my years of business, I've seen a lot of weird stuff, but this story you have here is setting off red flags in my mind, left, right, and center. If it was my client I would have already parted ways with them.

Have a stable contract that covers your liabilities.

If you don't. You really should just walk away from them. If you don't believe me, go see a lawyer in your area, that has no involvement with them, and get a consultation. Pay for it if you have to, the advice may very well save you.

 

[ChrisTech]

Either way, you will p**s one of them off and possibly lose their business, so you haven't got anything to lose by saying to them that you cannot go against client instructions and they just need to sort it out between themselves.

You will do what they agree to do.

 

[AlexCa]

I would very carefully consider if I need / want to have them as a client.

If yes, I think that the move that has the less chance to bring you problems is to reply to her saying that you're sorry but you need Mr. Something's, as your client, permission to do that*. If she still gives you trouble after that, I would seriously consider to stop doing business with them.

*And even such a simple statement may get you into troubles? Maybe she can respond to you that you never requested any permission before. And maybe you're legally required to do so. I have no idea.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Installing spy software is against the law. An employer can monitor an employee and may be required to notify them of it. That's not the case here.

 

[HCHTech]

But seriously, never get between the owners of a business, never get between a husband and wife, and never annoy a lawyer.

Man - words to live by, @Computer Bloke , words to live by.

 

[Archon Prime]

You know what they say about scabs...don't pick at them or the bleed. Unless you like that sort of thing, dealing with something like this with a LAWYER's office is just going to be dirty in the end. Get them to agree in person with you that this needs to be put back on. To be honest, their crap should be backed up onto a secure server anyway without the hassle/need for this spector program

 

[nlinecomputers]

To be honest, their crap should be backed up onto a secure server anyway without the hassle/need for this spector program

+100

 

[G8racingfool]

Sheesh. Why is the sky falling here?

Here's what you're going to do. You're going to very directly tell them that you need to meet with both of them at the same time. You will not put that program back on the husbands computer until this sit-down happens. If she doesn't like that then you tip your hat and say "so long then" and walk out the door (she'll push back but eventually agree). During the sit-down, you're going to explain the situation to both of them as clearly as possible and then say they need to decide together what's going to happen. You then say that you're going to step out of the room at let them discuss/decide independently. You'll probably get anywhere from a 1/2" off your seat to 2 steps from the office door before they'll tell you to put the program on the system and let it run. The important points here are to be direct, be polite but firm, and be clear.

Fire's put out, you're no longer the bad-guy, you've dealt with the situation (appropriately), and everyone knows what's going on.

Sometimes, as a tech, you have to play Dr. Phil.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Sheesh. Why is the sky falling here?

Here's what you're going to do. You're going to very directly tell them that you need to meet with both of them at the same time. You will not put that program back on the husbands computer until this sit-down happens. If she doesn't like that then you tip your hat and say "so long then" and walk out the door (she'll push back but eventually agree). During the sit-down, you're going to explain the situation to both of them as clearly as possible and then say they need to decide together what's going to happen. You then say that you're going to step out of the room at let them discuss/decide independently. You'll probably get anywhere from a 1/2" off your seat to 2 steps from the office door before they'll tell you to put the program on the system and let it run. The important points here are to be direct, be polite but firm, and be clear.

Fire's put out, you're no longer the bad-guy, you've dealt with the situation (appropriately), and everyone knows what's going on.

Sometimes, as a tech, you have to play Dr. Phil.

The problem is you are assuming that the wife is being upfront when she says that she only wants to protect data loss? What if she is slinging BS and she really wants to spy on the husband? If data protection is the only motive then why would Husband Lawyer not want it? Trust me this has nothing to do with data and it IS going to start a fight between the husband and wife.

 

[Archon Prime]

This is simply wanting control. As @nlinecomputers says it. It's just not data backup. there is something else in the back of her head she wants it for. simple.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Honestly, I wouldn't confront both at the same time. I would confront the wife again and tell her that what is being said will not leave the room unless she agrees to it.and explain to her that what she is doing is against the law because they are husband and wife. An employer can monitor an employee but that isn't the case here and you refuse to do it unless you bring in the husband and put the request in writing signed by both of them. Explain that your liability insurance is going to want this on file, they demanded it fact, as it has the trappings of illegal activity without signed consent. At that point, she will likely withdraw and you remind her that the conversations never happened. I would have the order written up ready for them both to sign.

 

[Mytechid]

Let's pause for a second and consider a few things.

What's your primary job here? You're the Tech. You're not a psychiatrist. Your not their couples counselor. Your not their business consultant (although you should be). Stay in your lane. Do not deviate from it unless you have experience in this other area and do it professionally.

I can not express the importance of only supporting what you sell, and what you have a professional level of experience in using. Not only will your sales excel if you stick to this, but you will be able to acquire client testimonials easier because you REALLY are a Pro at what you're doing.

You have two people at the top of the ladder in their business with conflicting interests. It's NOT your job to help them make up their minds.
IF you were selling them the product I would suggest that you get involved because it's something your selling and it reflects poorly on you if you don't help (Assuming there is no ulterior motive, which many of us believe the wife has).

Now let's put this in perspective.
CONS
1 This is not your product to support.
2 This couple has some kind of turmoil you DO NOT want to be involved in
3 This IS a Lawfirm (In my experience Lawyers and Healthcare Professionals are typically the first ones to push an attorney in your face)
4 You are NOT making nearly enough money to be involved in this "tit-for-tat" battle.
5 You denoted the business owner is ex-military and a hard-@#$. What I take from this is that you are not entirely comfortable with him.

PROS
1 Long-standing business relationship.

Possible Pros
Good money?
Client referrals?
Testimonials?

In the end, you should be able to clearly see the path in front of you. Stick with it, or walk away.

 

[G8racingfool]

The problem is you are assuming that the wife is being upfront when she says that she only wants to protect data loss? What if she is slinging BS and she really wants to spy on the husband? If data protection is the only motive then why would Husband Lawyer not want it? Trust me this has nothing to do with data and it IS going to start a fight between the husband and wife.

And you're putting words in peoples mouths and meaning to their actions by speculating about why someone wants to do something.

The OPs last sentence spells out exactly what the "right" thing to do is.

I know the right thing to do is to make sure they are both in agreement of having it installed

The best way to do this is to have them sit down and talk about it. Could it result in a fight? Yes, it could; but that's not the OPs fault if it does because, if it results in a fight, their marriage would have already been on the rocks to begin with and that's not the tech's fault (and is also why the tech should walk out of the room and, if necessary off premises).

And running around having secret meetings and making accusations about legalities is only going to breed animosity between the client and the tech. Having an out-in-the-open discussion clears the air and allows everyone to know their positions. (Besides, are you really going to lecture a lawyers wife about breaking the law?)

 

[nlinecomputers]

First of all, anytime any client asks me to break the law I am going to directly challenge it. I don't install pirated software and I don't install keyloggers/spy software without making sure that the proper legal requirements are met. Any request for keylogger software I have my clients put in writing. And you think this is going to get settled with an agreement to put the software on the PC? Obviously, it will not and I see no good in starting a fight between them that would get me fired. Because I would be their scapegoat. If the marriage IS having trouble would either of them want that reminder of how it all blew up every time I walked into the office? My way gives the woman an out without my company being at the center of their divorce spat.

And I am not saying to make accusations. You fall on the line that you are simply protecting my liability and theirs too by not accidentally engaging in an illegal wiretap. As I said I demand that all such requests be put in writing and that a proper use policy is in place.

 

[Mytechid]

@nlinecomputers promising to keep a meeting confidential between these two puts you right in the middle of it already. It permanently makes you the scapegoat. You won't ever be allowed to walk into the office if they separate or get a divorce because the husband won't trust you. NO lawyer is going to let you around company data if they don't trust you.

The issue here isn't the software she's asking you to install. She could be asking you to install Word, or Open Office. The issue is that you have the Decision Maker of the company, and his wife, battling it out, using you as the battlefield. You're going to lose every time in this scenario.

IF you support the wife and do what nlinecomputers recommends, you may be opening yourself up to legal action later down the road, that NO non-disclosure agreement can protect you from. IF they divorce, what's to stop the husband from citing this incident as a major factor in his divorce, and suing you for some kind of emotional damages? OR suing you for damages to his company because you assisted in the separation/divorce, which in turn causes waves of problems for the company? I would seriously be afraid of that possibility. Lawyers are the easiest kind of people to throw lawsuits in your face. They know the law! They know people who know the law. They know how to work it in their favor.

I think some of you really need to stop and think about this scenario and the benefits of getting involved, vs. the pain that being involved in this spat could cause you. If you've never been in a position like this and navigated through it successfully, you really shouldn't be providing advice.

A simple rule to live by.
Don't give advice if you haven't successfully done it yourself.

 

[nlinecomputers]

NO my position supports the status quo and that supports the husband. Recall, that He asked that the software he was never originally informed about be removed. The wife already was spying on him. Which goes back to the CYA move of always getting these requests in writing.

 

[fencepost]

I think @nlinecomputers has exactly the right approach here: "We could have that software on your staff computers because they're employees, but I'm not sure of the legal status of you and your husband in terms of owner vs. employee. Since we seem to have a lawyer available to check this, can you ask him to give me a call on this?"

Edit: I can also see plenty of reasons why an attorney might want to not have a recording of everything that's ever on his screen - particularly if said recordings might ever leave the building (say, with an off-site backup if it's not properly encrypted).

 

[Porthos]

The only winning move is not to play.

Global thermonuclear lawer/spouse war.
I will keep my quarter and I might just exit the Arcade as well.

 

[Alexey]

Global thermonuclear lawer/spouse war.

Yeah, that what it reminds me of.

Joshua: Shall we play a game?
...
David Lightman: [typing] Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?
Joshua: Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
[Jennifer laughs]
David Lightman: [typing] Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War.
Joshua: Fine.

(from 1983 War Games)

Legal stuff and such, well, that's usable but not helpful in this case. Either these two sort it out between themselves, or you will eventually lose them as a client. Sooner or later, and with more or less of a loss, that's a moot point at the moment, but I don't think you will be able to remain in this longterm. Lke, there are long snakes lurking somewhere under floors there, and these are not your snakes, its theirs, so you cannot fix the situation.