More handpicked essays just for you.
Should privacy be extended to the workplace
Should privacy be extended to the workplace
Introduction to legal and ethical issues of employee workplace monitoring
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
I think employers should monitor their employee’s workstation. After all, it is company property. I also think that they should not monitor their employee’s workstation area. Another question to ask is, “Is what they are doing legal? Or does it cross that illegal boundary?” On the one hand, they should monitor their employee’s work place area. It gives the employees the fear they need to stay on task and get their work completed. If an employee is doing anything but work, they would not be able to reach their deadlines in time. This could result in a termination from that job they are in. The employee should know this and keep himself/herself in check because they know in the back of their mind that if they do not finish whatever they are working on, they could get fired. Employees should not be able to go on to social media sites on their work computers because that would distract them. They also do not need to do that because the computer is owned by the company, not them. The other side of this is the fact that these employees are grown, sometimes responsible, adults and can do their job without being monitored twenty four seven. They should know that distractions could cost them their job. They also should know that everything has a time and place; they should not be doing anything but work on their …show more content…
Companies can legally monitor employees' activities if they have written policies stating they should not have an expectation of privacy at work. Employees who use company phones, Internet, computers and vehicles are responsible for following company policies and guidelines. Companies are responsible for notifying employees on what type of usage is acceptable and the consequence for misuse. Companies also must be aware of types of surveillance that cross the line and intrude on an individual's right to
For example, when they go to the gym, they like to monitor their heart rate. The emotions that arose in me while I read this article is that bosses should not have the control to monitor their employees and it should be the highest in the company you are, you should be monitored. They have more power in the company so, then they mess up it has more of an effect on the company. I think that the more important you are in the company the more you should be monitored. This changed my perspective on why do we have devices that allow other people to know where we are and how we are feeling when it should be for our benefit and not
In recent times our right to privacy has been under fire, particularly in the workplace. With the fear of terrorists in today's world, we have been willing to sacrifice some of our individual rights for the rights of a society as a whole. A majority of these changes have taken place since September 11, 2001, in an attempt to prevent future terrorist attacks. New legislation, such as the USA Patriot Act, which decreases the limitations on the federal government's ability to monitor people, has been created for this reason. Although new legislation may be instrumental in the defense of our national security, we must take a strong look at their effect and the effect of decreased privacy in the workplace. Advances in technology, coupled with new legislation, has had a serious toll on our privacy especially at work. It is now possible to monitor an employee's keystrokes on the computer to how much time a day is spent on bathroom breaks. It is imperative for us to take a stand against these violations to our rights
The use of Social Media in the workplace is counter-productive. There are many reasons why this is so. The workplace is the place where you should be working, not checking on what Aunt Ethell had for dinner last night or whether your friends posted that embarrassing weekend photo. Most workplaces have plenty of distractions on their own without adding the extra time-wasting properties of Social Media. There is also the argument that what you post on Social Media can affect the way you are perceived at work. If your habits are less than savoury and your colleagues have access to the proof, you could find yourself without a job at all. It is easy to "slip up" and say things online that you may not have intended to be in the public domain. Internet
In my opinion, employees should not be able to use the internet while at work. The computers and networks are business property and are solely used for business transactions. Thus, employers have a duty and a right to ensure proper usage of any, and all, equipment. If employers decide to, they may choose to monitor the usage of the internet to ensure the property is not abused. According to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, et. seq., (www.law.cornell.edu/uscode), federal law allows employers to monitor business calls, however, personal calls are an exception. Under the federal law and employer only has the right to monitor a call until they realize that it is a personal call then must cease monitoring. In the case of Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577, 583 (11th Cir. 1983), the court dictated that, "...a manager must cease listening in on an employee call once the call turns personal". When businesses first started using the internet, they did not contemplate developing new technology policies and were very liberal as to the usage of the internet. Eventually allowing liberal usage led to abuse of equipment and work time. Today, people check personal emails and facebook messages (among other social networking sites), take care of online banking, shopping, surf the net leisurely, and chat online. Employers have noticed this distraction severely impacted productivity and performance. Studies show, "Currently, as many as 26 million workers in the United States are monitored in their jobs, and this number will increase as computers are used more and more within companies and as the cost of these monitoring systems goes down" (DeTienne, 1993, p. 33). "By the end of the decade, as many as 30 milli...
5. As an employee of a company, there is an understanding of the amount of monitoring the employer does.... ... middle of paper ... ... (6/3/2004) 20 Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (2002) Employee Monitoring: Is There Privacy in the Workplace? .
Facebook and Twitter work-related conversations are under the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act. Employers are prohibited by the Act from restricting employee use of social media by excessive polices. Employees cannot be terminated disciplined for conducted on social media. The National Labor Relations Board received several charges in the year of 2010 regarding federal law violations which occurred as a result of Facebook postings. Complaints were issued to employers prior to an investigation which was conducted by NLRB. However there was no protection which covered the communications therefore no violation was committed. Several Board decision became more prevalent during the year of 2012. Which established precedence in regards to the
Another advantage is providing feedback to employees on their work performance. Instead of listening to a manager tell an employee how to do a job, one may review a tape to see exactly what they are doing wrong and judge the employees performance. In this case, monitoring is used as a tool to show employees their work habits and what they need to change to improve their performance. Employees generally like this because they can see for themselves their weak and strong points, and they can use the information to improve their work methods. This knowledge can increase employee performance and efficiency.
One type of surveillance is employee monitoring. Many employers monitor their workers’ activities for one reason or another. Companies monitor employees using many methods. They may use access panels that requires employees to identify themselves to control entry to various area in the building, allowing them to create a log of employee movements. They may also use software to monitor attendance and work hours. Additionally, many programs allows companies to monitor activities performed on work computers, inspect employee emails, log keystrokes, etc. An emerging methods of employee monitor also include social network and search engine monitoring. Employers can find out who their employees are associated with, as well as other potentially incriminating information. (Ciocchetti)
Privacy in the workplace can be very tricky because we are all different and our definition of privacy may not be the same. For this reason, there are privacy laws for example the Employee Polygraph Protection Act which prohibits private employers for the use of lie detector test on their employees or for those in the process of being employed by the company. Laws like these are meant to protect the privacy of the employee, but the employer is also able to protect their private information by having their employees sign a contract stating they will not give private company information to others. Blue Mountain Company had Tuff sign one of this contract stating their privacy rules regarding the company’s information and
Big companies have to worry about government surveillance as well. Even as far back as May of 2006, seven years before Snowden leaked NSA data, it was reported that the NSA had been tracking phone calls using the resources of several major telecom companies, and a couple of weeks later it was revealed that it had given access to At&t’s fiber-optic lines back in 2002, meaning that they were able to directly access the phone information of millions of Americans (Vicens 29)! Government surveillance isn’t just limited to phone companies, though. It was reported in 2007 that some big companies like Microsoft had started participating in an NSA program to give the government data from live chats, and many other big companies also agreed to hand over
A few questions have sparked discussion by many people. The first question being, should employers be able to check what possible employees have posted online? The second question, should employers be able to see what employees are doing on company computers during work hours? The final question being, should employers be able to check what employees are doing on their own time? These questions have become highly talked about subjects and people have different views on each topic of what is right or wrong for employers to check.
..., which can result in decreased productivity. An employee may be spending more time viewing their friends’ posts and pictures, rather than focusing on their job. Social media can be addicting to some people. This should be monitored by all business owners. Employees can attend a party with people taking pictures, and then the pictures can be misconstrued or distorted. Online reputational concerns can be critical for businesses along with their employees. It can result in loss of employment, loss of economics, and unforgivable social humiliations. Businesses are at another disadvantage while using social media because followers can post negative comments on the business’s Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram site. Also, a hacker can retrieve the company’s page and post false information. A business or organization’s reputation will suffer from these actions. (Oravec 97)
As every second of your life is going by, history is in the making. Time is always moving for everyone, whether someone's researching for a project with a time constraint, or just walking through the groceries aisle to look for dinner. People are always experimenting, and climbing steps to achieve advancements in every field. The past is not to be forgotten about, but rather to be observed to create the future. As Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who had recently passed away at 87 on July 2nd this year, writes, "You'll try to incite people to learn from the past and rebel, but they will refuse to believe you.
But, these laws always changing, depending on the work setting or policies set by any specific organizations. Because there are so many different work environments, each claim of privacy has to be evaluated based on the actual conditions of the workplace (Smith & Burg, 2015). This is why policies must be set according to the CEO needs. If the organization does not allow the use of the internet for any personal use, than the employee must follow such guidelines. This eliminates employee privacy right violations, because the policy will informs them of the monitoring during the hiring
As a result, the employees have a feel of their freedom to fade away and the surveillance gives them a pressure to perform as required by the employer. Hence, the situation arises to a point where employees have to deal with a lot of stress caused by the heavy workload. Under those circumstances, the workplace surveillance negatively impacts the workers performance. Instead of meeting their employers’ requirement, they end up degrading their productivity by the stress of being monitored for every moment. Moreover, it’s not just the performance that gets affected; employees’ personal health is also impacted by the stress.