Where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy in the workplace - Research Paper Example

Electronic surveillance of employees Abstract Technology has played a very important role especially in the world of business. Many business companies are applying different forms of technology with the aim of enhancing daily operations. This has somehow resulted to a lot of competition in the world of business. Electronic surveillance is one of the fields of technology that has been used by businesses in the world. This state of the art technology has been used with the aim of enhancing security in different business setting. Electronic surveillance has also been a system which has reduced the threat that has been posed by terrorism in the past few years. Businesses have experienced a lot of achievements and this can be related to the aspect of applying electronic surveillance in the business world. However, there have been some controversial issues in regard to electronic surveillance of employees in the business setting. There are a variety of ethical considerations that should be made before adopting and fully implementing the art of electronic surveillance for employees in any business setting. 1. Explain where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy in the workplace. As much as electronic surveillance has been embraced in the world of business, there are some important considerations that should be made on the part of the employee (Raban 2008). Some researchers view the art of electronic surveillance as an intrusion to privacy because there are some cases in which employees require privacy in the work place. Privacy is an important aspect for good human relations. An example of a location in which electronic surveillance should not be placed in the work environment is the wash rooms. Placing electronic surveillance cameras for employees in the wash rooms is an unethical act. Businesses which adopt such security strategies should be aware of the privacy needs of the employees. As much as high levels of security are placed by businesses, employees need some levels of privacy in various locations. 2. In the office workplace there are typically two types of workspaces, an open area, in which there are several desks and where conversations can be overhead, or an enclosed office, in which—when the door is closed—conversations cannot be heard and where one would expect virtually total privacy. Explain whether it makes a difference if an employee is in an open area or in an enclosed office. There is a difference between the locations in which an employee is found within the business setting. Employees have two kinds of settings in the work place. One of the locations is the open area. This is a location where employees can freely communicate and it is subdivided by desks for every employee. Electronic surveillance cameras are fixed in most open areas. The other kind of setting is the enclosed offices within the businesses. Most of these are reserved for the managers and other members of higher management. Questions have been raised as to whether there is a difference between the open areas and the enclosed offices. As much as there is a difference, the enclosed offices should be fixed with surveillance cameras as well (Slobogin 2007). The main reason to this is that it would prevent situations where employees are manipulated by top managers within the businesses. The enclosed offices should be treated just as the open area. As much as it is important to monitor employees at the lower level of management, it is also important to monitor employees at the higher management level of the organization. Most businesses are biased in that electronic surveillance is made for employees at the lower management level and not those at the higher management level. 3. Explain if Herman’s need to know whether his salespersons are honest is a sufficient ground for utilizing electronic surveillance. A business may prosper or fail and this may be as a result of the character exhibited by employees. Dishonesty is one of the ill characters that lead to the failure of most businesses. An employer has the obligation to analyze the behavior of the employees and ensure that dishonesty is not tolerated. With this note, Herman’s need to establish whether his employees are honest is a sufficient ground of improving the performance of the business. By utilizing electronic surveillance, Herman is on the verge of detecting any form of dishonesty from the employees. This is justified as long as the electronic surveillance instruments do not interfere with the private welfare of the employees. Privacy is important even in the working environment and this is the reason why it would be important to ensure that the welfare of the employees is taken under consideration (Landau 2011). 4. Explain to what extent an employer can engage in electronic surveillance of employees. There is always a limit to all the initiatives that an employer takes to safeguard the welfare of the business (Brookes 1996). This creates the impression that even with electronic surveillance of employees; the employer has to have a limit. An employer is at liberty to engage in electronic surveillance of employees up to the level where it seems to be ethical and does not interfere with the welfare of the employees. This limit is a good step to consider because the employer would be improving the relationship between the management and the employees. This limit would also be helpful to employees in that it would provide the environment where employees perform their duties without the feeling that they are being watched. This would have positive impacts within the business in that the employees’ production for the welfare of the business would increase. It is unethical to operate without limits especially when it comes to employer-employee relations. This initiative should be advocated for in any business setting. Employers should be encouraged to adopt such strategies to improve the welfare of their businesses. 5. Explain to what extent the inclusion of innocent, unaware third-parties in such surveillance determine whether it is legal. As much as electronic surveillance within the business setting is meant for employees within the business, third parties who are unaware of the surveillance are inevitable. There is an extent to which third parties may be involved in electronic surveillance within any business. This is what determines the legality of electronic surveillance involving third parties who are unaware of the surveillance. Third parties may only be involved in electronic surveillance of the business if their activities may have some significant amount of impact to the welfare of the business. If the third parties existence in the business is related to the operations of the business then it would be legal to include then in electronic surveillance of the business. If their activities are not related to the business then it would be illegal to involve in electronic surveillance. These are some of the measures that should be taken into considerations to ensure that the welfare of every party that may be entangled in this web is taken care of. Conclusion Business security is very important and there are many reasons as to why every employer should adopt electronic surveillance as a security measure. Electronic surveillance is one of the latest technologies that have been adopted by various businesses in different parts of the world. This system has a lot of ethics involved hence why employers should be very cautious when adopting the security measure. Electronic surveillance involves employees and third parties who might or might not be aware of the surveillance. This therefore poses a challenge to employers in trying to ensure that electronic surveillance within the work place does not affect the operations within the business. Reference: Brookes, P. (1996). Electronic Surveillance Devices, New York: Newnes Landau, S. (2011). Surveillance or Security?: The Risks Posed by New Wiretapping Technologies. Michigan: The MIT Press. Raban, J. (2008). Surveillance. London: Routledge. Slobogin, C. (2007). Privacy at Risk: The New Government Surveillance and the Fourth, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Read More