The Movements of Employees at Work Abstract - Essay Example

 The Movements of Employees at Work Abstract Employee monitoring is a moral dilemma which has to be contended with. The use of electronic communication has gained prominence in the modern workplace. It is also an area that attracts scrutiny from managers and business owners. Electronic communications like email, telephone, fax and web browsing are thought to be the most abused resources by employees therefore calling for their monitoring (Baase, 1997). It is this monitoring that has raised ethical issues causing detrimental effects to both employer and employee. Whereas employers justify their actions with the right to get value from their employees and resources, employees’ have objected with the reasoning that their personal privacy is being unlawfully breached. Background Employee monitoring can be defined as the act of surveillance and monitoring employees’ actions during stipulated working hours by use of employer equipment (Stanton & Stam, 2006). It entails the use of computers to record, evaluate and observe an employees’ use of computer, plus communications like web sites visited and emails sent or received besides telephone calls made. However, it is legal for employers to use computer programs to monitor employees (Duquenoy, Jones & Blundell, 2008). Employee surveillance has gained prominence as a prerequisite and in the same breath a contentious issue due to the complexity and prevalent use of technology at the work place. Employers are worried with employees’ proper behavior and conformity to work related regulations. Hence some critics believe employee monitoring is an inalienable responsibility. To others it is an invasion to privacy. Managers employ different ways of monitoring employees’ internet use, emails and their location to capitalize on employee productivity, uphold the integrity of the firm and to defend the interest of clientele and work mates (Duquenoy, Jones & Blundell, 2008). When managers start to probe into employees’ private life, mistrust and acrimony are built between employees’ and managers. Many workers have lost their employment and a lot more companies have had to face lawsuits filed against them because people believe that the use of internal company communications should remain confidential (Bassick, 2007). Managers and owners of private firms have had several reasons to scrutinize the activities of their employees. Some are driven by the displeasure when employees misuse company money and waste time to carry out non-work related tasks. Others would want to confirm any suspicion of criminal, fraudulent or unwanted conduct by their employees; observe application of safety and health regulations; make certain to compliance of internal employment policies; verify the quality of work done; protect staff from harassment or unjust treatment in the office and so forth (Lane, 2003). Managers base their actions on the basis that they have a right to examine employee productivity and to guard against fraud and theft. This will ultimately lead to employee monitoring (Lane, 2003). Some of the areas prone to abuse in the work places include use of company resources like vehicles, technology adapted at workplace like electronic communication, and adherence to acceptable working hours. In this report, I will review employee monitoring on their use of electronic communication at the workplace, more so the ethical dilemma facing managers and employees. Hence the questions of how far should managers go to examine employee movements? With the arrival of advanced technological capabilities, many professional and personal tasks are becoming quicker and more convenient to carry out. For instance, email has been viewed as a convenient substitute to making telephone calls because it is perceived as private. In the real sense it is public because it leaves a record long after it has been deleted (Bassick, 2007). Thus a skilled person can easily retrieve it from a networked communication system. Managers have had to justify their surveillance on employees. Some of their rationale include: Research conducted shows that employees spend a considerable amount of time on the internet doing no-work related activities. This translates to a substantial loss of revenue on internet costs. Knowing that time is money, managers believe they have a right to scrutinize employees since they are being remunerated to perform certain duties and the money wasted hurts their business in the long run. Another concern to employers is use of emails in stealing proprietary information. This information could land on competitors thus threatening a business’s competitive advantage (Tavani, 2007). One argument is that companies have a right to detail how office equipment is used since they are the possessors of these assets. Thus managers will base their arguments on the basis that they have a duty to defend against the utilization of its resources incorrectly. Therefore a misuse of office equipment should not be borne by the employer (Baase, 1997). Advocates of employee surveillance also argue that managers have a right to monitor productivity levels of their workers. This is intended at increasing effectiveness. Many managers screen web sites visited, emails sent, phone calls made, monitor key stroke accuracy and employee movements within the company building. They use their findings to predict outputs and appraise individual employees (Duquenoy, Jones & Blundell, 2008). Finally, employers will intrude on workers privacy to protect the interests of its stakeholders. They include suppliers, customers, creditors and shareholders. Their motivation is that the company is accountable for the actions and behaviors of its employees. Although these arguments are legitimate that certain levels of surveillance are required, it does not make it automatically right. From ethical considerations, employees do not renounce all their privacy when taking up employment (Stanton & Stam, 2006). Therefore the following moral issues have been pointed out against deliberate employee surveillance. Many employees regard surveillance actions as unethical and invasion of their confidentiality. Although strictly speaking, unannounced surveillance is not illegal. Many employees also feel distracted and become excessively watchful of what is permitted and what is not (Lane, 2003). In addition, studies suggest that computer monitored workers suffer higher levels of stress, moral and health problems as compared to other non-computer monitored employees. Further more, the cost of purchasing surveillance equipment, installation, maintenance and monitoring could be costly to a company. Trust is also a major ethical issue in surveillance. Once lost, it could be difficult for employers to regain it (Stanton & Stam, 2006). In workplaces where monitoring is common, the society has been found to be in problems. Another ethical issue of surveillance is fairness. It is argued that line workers are most likely to be subjected to monitoring unlike their superiors. One area that this is prevalent is key stroke monitoring. Others have also questioned the rational of monitoring as the only means of obtaining information by employers (Espejo, 2011). As discussed above, employee monitoring can become counterproductive if not approached carefully. Without initially providing guidelines for suitable behavior and informing employees that monitoring may be used to examine their activity and implement the established policies, any efforts to examine a workstation handling can be thought of as a violation of confidentiality. This may open businesses to lawsuits (Duquenoy, Jones & Blundell, 2008). The challenge facing managers are implementing surveillance programs that guard the business, attain compliance and safeguard against employee harassment while being respectful to individual confidentiality rights of workers being monitored (Stanton & Stam, 2006). According to Stanton & Stam, (2006), the initial step in instituting this program is to develop a written Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) that workers must read and sign, agreeing to put up with its contents. You should consult your workers while drafting these policies. The standards and rules expected when using business communication should be expressly affirmed in the policy. The policies will prevent employees from suing you on the basis of unfair dismissal. You can also supplement your policy with laws such as The Data Protection Act (1998), The Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communication s) Regulations (2000) and Freedom of Information Act (2000) With its good intentions, examining employees at the workplace should have a limit as guided by relevant legislation, lawsuit precedence and policies put in place. Conclusion In examining the movements of their employees, managers are confronted with the challenge of striking the right balance (Lane, 2003). Businesses have to uphold employee efficiency, meet conformity requirements and guard against lawful liability, in the same breath carry out monitoring activities in an ethical manner that does not lead to invasion of employees’ personal privacy. In recognizing their inherent obligation to monitor their businesses, whether consented to or not by employees, managers must be cautious to prevent anxiety and animosity at the work-place (Tavani, 2007). Thus limits acceptable for employee monitoring should be guided by inalienable right to personal privacy. Hence employees must be informed of any monitoring policy at their workplace. In retrospect, adoption of a monitoring system should be based on genuine reasons and acceptable to all parties concerned (Stanton & Stam, 2006). . References Baase, S. (1997). A gift of fire: social, legal, and ethical issues in computing. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Bassick, M. (2007). The ethical imperative in the context of evolving technologies. Boulder, Colo.: [Students in the spring 2007 seminar entitled "Ethics and Technology"]. Duquenoy, P., Jones, S., & Blundell, B. G. (2008). Ethical, legal and professional issues in computing. Australia: Thomson. Espejo, R. (2011). Privacy. Detroit: Greenhaven Press Lane, F. S. (2003). The naked employee: how technology is compromising workplace privacy. New York: AMACOM. Stanton, J. M., & Stam, K. R. (2006). The visible employee: using workplace monitoring and surveillance to protect information assets--without compromising employee privacy or trust. Medford, N.J.: Information Today. Tavani, H. T. (2007). Ethics and technology: ethical issues in an age of information and communication technology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Read More