Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Facebook ethics dilemma
Essays on ethical issues on social networking
Ethical problems in social media
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Arguments The Wall Street Journal posted an article in October 2014 showing the two opposing opinions regarding employer monitoring of social networking. Nancy Flynn, the founder and executive director of the ePolicy Institute, held the stance that, “Keeping an eye on employees helps companies protect themselves.” In her opinion, “Management has a right and responsibility to monitor how employees are using social media at all times.” Flynn argues that organizations must be proactive in their approach to social networking. The rapid increase in use by employees equally increases the chance of damages, whether intentional or unintentional, to a company’s reputation or through security and information leaks. By being proactive, an organization can act more quickly to rectify the situation and hold those responsible accountable. As far as hiring practices are concerned she argues …show more content…
Due to the ease of misuse, many organizations find it necessary to monitor communications. This is done to ensure proper use of company assets, maintain reputation, and manage productivity. This can include email, phone, video, and the internet. In an article by The Entrepreneur Andrew Walls, security and risk officer at Stamford, suggests that the key to ethical communications monitoring is in management knowing the difference between monitoring and surveillance and that they are transparent about their actions. General monitoring of abuse with prior disclosure to employees is legal and reasonable in the workplace. What should be avoided is more intrusive and personal surveillance, without disclosure, consent, or just cause. An employer could also unintentionally discover personal information about employees, such as religion, sexual orientation, medical issues, or political views that could open the organization up to possible lawsuits over discrimination. (Richmond,
In Fitbit for Bosses written by Lynn Stuart Parramore she talks about how bosses want to start monitoring their employees. Parramore shows her discomfort with this idea. She thinks that “big money seems poised to trump privacy”(Parramore). Which basically just means that for bosses is that money is over everything even privacy. Allowing bosses to monitor their employees is dishonest and manipulating.Some researchers have also found out that increasing surveillance has caused the decrease of productivity. Researchers warned them that the data can have big errors and people that look at the data that the fitbits can cherry-pick the information that supports their beliefs and ditch the rest of the information that leads to racial profiling. “Surveillance makes everyone seem suspicious, creating perceptions and expectations of dishonesty.” Workers will become dehumanized“(Parramore), it prevents them from experimenting and exercising the creativity on the job.” A woman from California filed a suit against her former employer because he forced her to to install a tracking app on her phone. She had to have it on her phone 24/7 or else she would
For example, Rosen states, “According to a recent survey by Microsoft, seventy percent of U.S. recruiters report that they have rejected candidates because of information found online,” (Rosen, Para. 3). Most of the time it is a necessity for companies to do online and background research on candidates because of wanting a safe environment to work in. Social media sites are the fastest way to see who a person truly is. But sometimes it can just be a character they posses because that’s what they’re followers want to see rather than their true self. Jokes can be made and other people do not see it that way which leads to your workplace seeing it and thinking that you’re a bad and trouble person. Rosen’s article informs his readers that you don’t want to be that person where one little thing you did on social media defines your whole life and you’re known for it. The new privacy on Facebook made certain parts of a user’s profile public which caused many criticism from users. Rosen also credits four democratic senators, Charles Schumer of New York, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Al Franken of Minnesota, and Mark Begich of Alaska. The four democratic senators were also concerned about the privacy changes Facebook made. They expressed their concern of “instant personalization” feature and new privacy settings to the chief executive of
Most individuals use these social networks and applications as an outlet to connect with old friends and family, share media, and keep up with everyday topics. Sometimes, employees exchange social media accounts if they become friends at work, which is acceptable. But, if an employer decides to review an employee or potential employee’s personal account without their permission, that is an invasion of privacy. Also, a person’s social media account should not have to be monitored or reviewed by an employer, especially if it does not relate to the job itself. Everyone deserves privacy, and if an employee’s social media account(s) have to be monitored, the same should apply to the employers as
For many years, there has been an ongoing fight between employers and employees pertaining to employee rights. The main thing that they have fought about is computer and email monitoring.
Social media has immensely evolved in how many companies and employers do business in recent years. It has helped many companies grow and expand by usage of social media by mass and instant communication and advertising through this technology. Like anything, there is a side effect. The social media "downfall” is the subject of employees bashing their employer's reputation in regards of employee’s communication via social media about their employers. With such controversy, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has had to step in to distinguish what is considered lawful of unlawful termination due to these actions by employees and their employers. The question to ask if such an issue should arise is to determine if it is concerted activity or not. This will help the NLRB determine if proper disciplinary procedures have been taken.
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
Terms and Laws have gradually change overtime dealing with different situations and economic troubles in the world in general. So then dealing with these issues the workplace has become more complex with little or no rights to privacy. Privacy briefly explained is a person’s right to choose whether or not to withhold information they feel is dear to them. If this something will not hurt the business, or its party members then it should be kept private. All employees always should have rights to privacy in the workplace. Five main points dealing with privacy in public/private structured businesses are background checks, respect of off duty activities/leisure, drug testing, workplace search, and monitoring of workplace activity. Coming to a conclusion on privacy, are there any limits to which employers have limitations to intrusion, dominance on the employee’s behavior, and properties.
ates another's privacy. Violation of ones personal privacy, via computers, may in part be due to the incomplete understanding of responsibility on the part of those involved. Is it a management or a technical concern?
The privacy of all personnel information held within an employer’s database are protected and controlled by a number of federal statutes. The employee has the basic rights that protect each employee privacy so that their information is not shared without their prior knowledge or with any outside company. Moreover, employees may not like that their computer, email and/or internet use is monitored and stored with the company’s database, but the employer has the rights to know how its equipment
...HR professionals, but can be a dangerous ‘foe’ when used inappropriately.” (Davison, Maraist, & Bing, 2011) As long a recruiters apply uniform reviewing techniques social media can be successfully to help in hiring qualified individuals that will meet the needs of the company.
Gordon, Philip L. "Federal Judge's Victory Just the First Shot in the Battle Over Workplace Monitoring." Privacy Foundation Sep. 2001.
Policies affect employee privacy by lowering employees' expectations of privacy in the workplace because he or she cannot expected privacy if an employee conducts the activity in a manner open to other employees. If an employee's reasonable expectations are similar to the privacy of personal mail delivered from the post office, he or she may believe the computer are just as private as the documents that he or she stored in the personal workplace's desk or filing cabinet. This reasoning of employee's reasonable expectations violates the employee's privacy. Yet, the employer stands may be that it has a justifiable interest in the oversight of business related employees communications, and in the cost of the used of the computer system. Only through consideration will these two interests will allow the right determination to be determine.
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
Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter allow users to access company information, photos and employees as well as ask questions and express personal experiences with the company. It also allows potential employees to understand the vibe of the organization and gain a deeper and more personal understanding than a website. However, with social media, it is important to not ove...
..., 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)