Need this corrected because there are too many grammatical errors

Running head: EMPLOYEE MONITORING 1

EMPLOYEE MONITORING 6

Employee Monitoring

Employee Monitoring

Introduction

The level of privacy one expects at the workplace differs depending on whether one is a private or government employee, whether one is in a union or not, whether one is protected or employee-at-will, among other factors. Generally, employers have an upper hand and a leeway in monitoring employee’s actions and sort information guided by reasonable and legitimate business purpose. The issue of privacy has been supported by businesses as they try to protect their entities. However, customers and employees feel like this is an infringement to their rights to privacy. In most instances, employers tend to have a margin in setting privacy terms as employees have to agree to those terms. One notable element is that in some circumstances, customers or even employees do not know that they are being tracked (Littman, 2000). This further makes the whole issue contentious as both divides try to reach a solution.

Business Privacy Elements

One of the reasons employees engage in monitoring is trying to understand the nature and needs of their customers. Businesses are changing their privacy options in order to safeguard their entities. Businesses are adopting policies that encompass spying their customers. Bryson gives one instance where a clothing store spying on customers while their trying on their clothes. One wouldn’t think that a clothing line can keep watch of a customer trying on the clothes. Of course such an activity is obvious so private that businesses ought not to spy on such. However, businesses assert that they ought to safeguard their products especially in scenarios of shoplifting. When a customer tries clothes without surveillance, then there is a likelihood that he/she may resort to shoplifting without the outlet knowing. In a bank scenario, it’s common for banks to spy on their customer’s health in order to ascertain their viability to paying loans. In both instances, businesses base their spying on protecting their assets while customers view it as an infringement to their right to privacy (Rossler, 2005).

Employer – Employee Privacy Elements

There are different rules and boundaries that regards employees’ rights in the face of privacy issues. This calls for an analysis on where employee privacy at the workplace comes into play. There are two forms of privacy that businesses should be familiar with informational privacy which focuses on disclosure of sensitive or confidential info and autonomy privacy that gives employees the right to conduct personal activities and make intimate personal decisions without interference or observation. The ways in which employers violate the privacy of staff members at the workplace presents a debate as to the level of spying. Bryson gives an analysis on how pharmaceutical companies and businesses are more concerned with the health of their employees. Revealing medical information to employers remains a key issue. Pharmaceutical businesses want to have the health records of their employees as some health conditions they may have may make them steal drugs for their own use or not be competent at work (Bryson, 1999). In addition, asking staff to take drug tests especially when there is suspicion of some health elements and doing random drug tests presents a major issue. [footnoteRef:1]Other elements involved in privacy issues include (Littman, 2000): disclosing reasons behind firing a person especially in cases where employers would not want such to know as it may not be healthy for their business; monitoring staff through video or computer usage especially where there is a rational expectation of privacy; engaging in intrusive investigations, and searching employees and their belongings from time to time. [1: 1 Employer-employee relationship is essential if an organization is to realize its goals. If there are trust issues and the employer cannot delegate full responsibility to employees without spying then productivity decreases especially if employees are fully aware they are being monitored. ]

Privacy in use of Information Technology

Almost everything one does in the office computer is monitored. Monitoring is normally unregulated by most businesses. With individual lives moving online, such intrusions have devastating implications for people’s right to privacy. Employer may watch, listen, and read most of employee’s workplace communications. When employees are using their employers equipment’s and machines, it becomes difficult for courts to back employees when they file cases of privacy invasion (Littman, 2000). Their expectations of privacy is normally limited. Privacy is therefore threatened when everywhere we go, everything we say, and everyone we seem to associate to presents clearly in the limelight. People should not be made to choose between using the new technologies and keeping their personal information private. [footnoteRef:2]Businesses should work on promoting and facilitating a future where technologies can be applied in ways that strive to protect liberties, limit collection of any personal information, and ensure that people have control over their personal information or data. Wireless devices are also powerful tracking systems that can at times be used to infringe on an individual’s privacy. Knowing an employee’s phone whereabouts reveals sensitive information such as when they visit a doctor, where they stay, and where and who they spend their time with. [2: 2 As businesses cannot negate the use of technologies, it’s essential that they be used appropriately while protecting the rights of employees. This should be based on applicable Acts and Laws while at the same time organizations ought to come up with internal policies that protect employees and ensure their privacy rights are not infringed. ]

Institutions such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) works to facilitate that any cell phone information or data is protected against any unjustified disclosure. The ACLU advocates in State Legislatures, Congress, and in courts to ensure that law enforcement in needed to comply with Fourth Amendments’ warrant requirements before sorting cell phone information or data from the service providers or even tracking cell phones directly by use of Stingray devices referred to as cell site simulators (Rossler, 2005).

Conclusion

The analysis of employee monitoring provides an understanding of how employers are engaging in spying activities with the aim of monitoring activities and safeguarding their entities. However, employees and customers feel that this infringes on their right to privacy. The case of a clothing store monitoring their customers as they try on the different outfits presents a larger context of the extent to which businesses are willing to go through to safeguard their interests. However, there need to be a clear understanding on the level of spying so as not to be considered inhumane or infringe on people’s rights.

References

Bill Bryson. (1999) Am a Stranger Here Myself The Mail

Littman. J. (2000) “Information Privacy/Information Property” Stanford Law Review.

Rossler, B. (2005) ‘The Value of Privacy” Cambridge UK: Polity.

Wesley Burrell. (2011) “I am He and you are He and You are Me: Being able to be Yourself, Protecting the Integrity of Identity Online” Retrieved from https://www.dropbox.com/s/e3af4gsck0gdw3z/Identity%20Online%20Article.pdf?dl=0