Employee Privacy Rights in the Workplace - Literature review Example

Topic: Privacy Rights in the Work Place Introduction: This paper maintains that employee monitoring is a positive action in the workplace because it allows the employer to see the actions and performances of their employees. This position is being taken in the light or the invocation of the right privacy among workers in the workplace. It will discuss there advantage and disadvantage of having monitoring systems. The paper defend position where the advantage far outweighs the disadvantages of having monitoring systems The right employers to monitor employee performance Employers pay the employees salary and therefore management has the right to control and direct performance of work in the workplace. In providing so providing goods and service, the employer has the prerogative to train employees and to bring the level of performance that would sustain its business and earn profits accordingly. Mishra & Crampton (1998) cited the reality of business monitoring when they said: Managers use several types of employee monitoring systems. Some of the most commonly used are computed monitoring, which measures employee keystroke speed and accuracy; video surveillance, which detects employee theft, horseplay, and safety, spying, which uses detective techniques, when there is a suspicious activity within the workplace; eavesdropping and phone tapping, which track incoming, outgoing, and the frequency of employee phone calls; and the active badge system, which tracks an employee’s location within the workplace. The same authors admitted that despite the recent appearance of theses high-tech-monitoring systems, employee monitoring is not new to the business world. Citing Losey (1994, p.770) they mentioned about “employee monitoring has been utilized in the manufacturing industry for several decades to track output, inventory and general efficiency. They, citing Attewell (1987), even reported that prior to 1913, mechanical keystroke counters (cyclometers) and other methods were used or measuring typing output, and since the 1920s telephone calls have been monitored. They quickly pointed out that what has changed in most recent years is the method of supervision and extent of information gathering capabilities available. Inferentially, Mishra & Crampton (1998) said that electronic monitoring, although newer in origin, is intrinsically nor more invasive than traditional supervision. They, however, realized the fact that for some employees, it may actually be less than direct personal supervision. Advantages for employees Monitoring as a management tool may not necessarily mean it is always against employees. In discussing its advantages for employees Mishra & Crampton (1998) said: “Electronic monitoring offers a distinct advantage to the employee: it is objective” (Workshop, p 1025). This is a benefit because it provides an unbiased method of performance evaluation and prevents the interference of manager’s feelings in employee review. Electronic-generated information offers uniform and accurate feedback on past performance. Thus, the evaluation will solely be based on the quantity and quality of an employee’s work, rather than on managers’ opinions. Mishra, & Crampton (1998) further stated another advantage, which is, providing feedback to employees on their work performance that instead of listening to a manager tell how to do you job, rules and standards are established. The authors said: “In this case, monitoring is used as a tool to show employees their work habits and what they need to change to improve their performance…This knowledge can increase employee performance and efficiency.” They cited De Tienne (1993.p.35) about a study conducted by Christopher Earley in 1988, which indicated that the computer-based feedback has a greater impact on an employee’s performance if he if he or she receives it directly from the system than if it is provided by a supervisor. Disadvantages for employees In discussing the disadvantages of monitoring, Mishra, & Crampton (1998) said: “Although the advantages are important and helpful to employees, the disadvantages that go along with employee monitoring may outweigh the benefits. While the employers argue that monitoring is inexpensive to increase productivity and customer service, others argue it is really the modern method of exerting control and power over labor. Monitoring has been used to determine pay and promotion decisions as wells as to reinforce disciplinary actions.” The authors also cited the work of Lund (1992, p. 54), which mentioned the fact the AFL-CIO objects to monitoring because it “invades workers’ privacy, erodes, their sense of dignity and frustrated their efforts to do high quality work by a single-minded emphasis on speed and other purely quantitative measurements.” An individual my may thus be employed and the employer may be entitled to monitor his performance in exchange for the salary but employees groups claim that there are things that are inherent in human being there already even before they get employed and that is the right to privacy. The right to privacy as against the right to earn profit for the business Rich (1995) aptly described the right when he said: “The right to privacy plays a unique role in American law and society. Privacy, although not explicitly protected by the Constitution, is considered a core value by most Americans. It has also taken on multifarious meanings so that it no longer conveys one coherent concept. Privacy rights, guaranteeing an individual's right to a private life, find their authority in the Constitution, state constitutions, federal and state statutes, and tort law judicial decisions.” Why do employees need privacy? There are so many claims about this right to privacy. Human right groups say people have the right to privacy. They want to be let alone. With their individuality, comes their creativity and decision making skills being improved. When they are given the chance to reflect without other people having to know said things, humans perform better. Moreover, employees claim they need to be trusted; they say that sometimes they abhor being monitored because it may mean not being trusted. The employees typically argue: “Employer should trust employees. They should be more interested in the output than the daily manner of doing their jobs. Employees are not robots; they are human being who must exercise a great part of their individuality to assert their sense of identity. If constantly watched an employee would be reduced to a robot.” Of course employees are human beings but the businessmen takes risk in every investment that they may make, they want to stay competitive in the enterprise; they want to deliver the best service to these customer. Hence employees must be submissive when they are inside the workplace. The employees need to put their best when they are in work place hence they should sacrifice a part of their privacy by having their performance monitored. When an employee enters the workplace, he or she comes to work, therefore he or she surrenders a part of his or her privacy and he or she should not make an excuse for his inefficiency or laziness in the guise of his or her right to privacy. An employee may however argue: “An employee need to share a concern to a trusted friend whom he trusts could understand him alone. If that privacy zone is violated, he would feel offended and if will result to resignations and if not eventual terminations where people are not willing to lose their privacy. In such eventuality, there is high cost of labor turnover which is more costly to the employer.” Well the employee may opt to lose his or her job if he does not want to submit performance evaluation. Conclusion: It is given in business that managers have the right to expect the level of performance of employees to be within a given standard. The employees who cannot deliver standard performance deserved not to be hired in the first place. The right to privacy, however, must be respected as to their personal lives. Common sense of course will tell that no employer in his right mind should know what the employer is doing inside the comfort room because that would not extend to monitoring performance except of course if the employee spends most of his or her time inside the comfort room. When the employees applied they consented to give the best to their work because they are paid. The employer is taking too much risk or to have hired an employee just to be wasting time doing unnecessary or personal things inside the workplace. The employees need to do this best because competition in business will always be there. When the employer hired the employees the employees submitted power and control over some part of their right to privacy. Business establishments then, which operates under validly existing laws of the state have more reason right to control how work are to done in providing goods and services to customers without violating the claimed rights of employees to privacy. Monitoring should be done in all areas related to employee performance to assure the employer a fair share in the pie with it paying the employees salary. Employers provide not only financial satisfaction, hence it must get what it deserve from the other end through more loyal, efficient and effective employees who must make their time available while in employment. Monitoring does not only benefit the employer. It benefits also the employees as far is performance is concerned. A good business relationship could mean long employment also because of better profits because of better service to customers brought about by better performance. Why would it be hard or both employees and employer to work together along this line without too much issues on right to privacy. Bibliography: 1. Attewell, P. (1987, spring). Big brother and the sweatshop: Computers surveillance in the automated office. Sociological Theory, 5,87-99. 2. De Tienne, K.B. (1993,) Big brother or friendly coach? The Futurist, 27 (5) p.33-37. 3. Losey, M. R. (1994, September). Workplace privacy: Issues and Implications, USA Today, 76-78 4. Lund, J. (1992). Electronic Performance monitoring: A review of the research issues. Applied Economics, (23(1), 54-58 5. Mishra, J & Crampton, S. (1998), Employee Monitoring: Privacy in the Workplace? SAM Advanced Management Journal (1984), 63(3), 4. Retrieved Friday, May 12, 2006 from the Business Source Complete database 6. Rich L. (1995) Right to Privacy in the Workplace in the Information Age, Publishing Law Center,)5.. "Bosses with X-Ray Eyes - Special Report on Electronic Privacy," (July, 1993), Macworld 7. Workshop, R. L. (1993, November 19) Privacy in the workplace. CO Researcher, p 1011- 1025 Read More