Employer Privacy
Employees in today's society are worrying about their privacy in the workplace. A problem that has become a big controversial issue is monitoring in the work environment. The purpose of this report is to analyze the fairness and control over the personal privacy infrastructure of the workplace. Monitoring employees work output such as e-mail, business calls, or searching through files, is a subject that is highly complex. Employers today are interested in screening their employees to make sure that customers are being treated properly. A study done in April of 2000, by the American Management Association, found that the number of companies today that are monitoring their employees has risen from 45% in 1998 to 74% in 1999. (Benner, 2001) It is in question whether or not work output is subject to review by your company. Employers have a number of reasons to monitor an employee's work out put. An employer's interest in employee personal information is in order to com!pliance with discrimination laws, to administer work place benefits, or to appropriately place workers in positions. The incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights through the Human Rights Act may make it possible to challenge some surveilla
The Employee Polygraph protection Act of 1988 prevents most private employers from using lie detector tests to screen job applicants or current employees, unless there is reasonable suspicion. Employers also frequently state that they simply see video surveillance as an effective means of improving security and in some instances, serving specific functions such as improving quality control and maintaining compliance with regulations. " (United States Department of Justice, 2001) Under common law, unreasonable intrusions into employees' private affairs are prohibited. According to Repa (2001), some employers have attempted to clear up the question of what is and is not considered private about workplace computers by writing specific policies forbidding employees from using each others computer. Most computer monitoring equipment allows employers to monitor without the employees' knowledge. Respondents were more likely to support drug screening for those employed !as airline pilots, school bus drivers, or doctors (Institute for a Drug-free Workplace, 1997). A drug test can reveal things such as a heart condition, depression, epilepsy or diabetes. The employer must be accountable to those affected by the decision to monitor by considering their personal interests. Many employers believe that the use of improved training programs can help to develop honest and supportive employee and employer relationships in the workplace. For instance keep your personal telephone calls, personal e-mails, and personal belongs for the most part at home and out of the work place. For example, if an employer explicitly states that employees will be notified when telephone monitoring takes place, the employer must honor that policy. Sometimes instead of using interoffice mail to transfer a document to his or her supervisor, the boss may save time by simply reading it on the employee's computer. (International Labor Organization, 2001) Most often surveillance is conducted secretly. " The Fourth Amendment prohibits management from observing electronically what it can see with the naked eye. 4% taped phone conversation 13.
Common topics in this essay:
Department Justice,
Fourth Amendment,
Association International,
Nurses Association,
Senate Labor,
Kent Holtorf,
Rights Clearinghouse,
Rights Act,
Drug Testing,
According Repa,
drug testing,
fourth amendment,
computer monitoring,
expectation privacy,
electronic mail,
department justice 2001,
lie detector,
department justice,
privacy rights,
justice 2001,
united department justice,
united department,
reasonable expectation privacy,
american management association,
lie detector test,
|
Acceptance Essays
