DeLa said:
I think you misunderstood.
Option: mark mail as UNread - understand: employee has read mail,
responded in a bad way or not at all, now there are problems because
of that and employee wants to get out of it by showing manager the
Outlook screen and saying "look, I have not read it yet, I was too
busy, you can't blame me etc." while in fact employee has turned the
mark back to not-read.
Then:
They want to be able to do that: they = managers
They do not want them to be able to do that: they = managers, them =
other users.
That is how I understand the OP. The manager in question probably has
a lot of other problems with his own people if both employees and
manager turn to this kind of tactics, but I suppose the original
poster is not in a position to evaluate her work or explain to her
that a lot of normal employees might use the 'turn back to not read'
as a way to make sure they return to the mail at some point.
If it is possible to change this, you'll have to try and look for it
on the TechNet site I'm afraid. It will require some specialist
tweaking.
If I were the OP I'd explain that it is maybe possible but would
require several days of research and working on it (and do nothing
else instead) and ask her if that is ok to go and the n ask for an
extra day to make sure that managers still can turn read mail back to
not read.
--DeLa
Then I'd suggest the manager enforce a policy where read receipts must
be enabled for an automatic response. Whatever the user does with the
read and unread options is irrelevant since a read receipt would have
been sent to the sender. However, to prevent abuse of read receipts
from senders outside the company, the company's mail server should strip
out the header from e-mails that specifies a request for a read receipt.
I think this is the "Disposition-Notification-To: "sendername"
<senderemail>" header. Then the only read receipts that the recipient
will send are those to senders within the same company. The sender
would have to remember to request a read receipt. For time critical
e-mails or to prove the recipient read their e-mail, this would be
mandatory, anyway.
Alternatively, the sender could request a delivery receipt. If the only
requirement was to verify the message got delivered and recipients were
responsible for monitoring their e-mails then the excuse of "I haven't
read it" would prove the employee was not doing their job (provided
their manager alloted sufficient time for the employee to read their
e-mails based on how busy that employee was with other tasks, and a
manager should be tracking their employee's progress; otherwise, the
lazy manager is the one that needs "correction"). It got to their
mailbox and they are responsible for reading all their e-mails as part
of their employment. If they don't want to perform their job duties
then they can seek employment elsewhere that doesn't have this condition
of employment. They do their job or they get canned.
Want to travel to new places, see new people, have new experiences?
**** up one more time and you're fired! Travel to the unemployment
office, see new people in the long lines, and learn to wash dishes and
ask "You want fries with that?".
