Electronic Surveillance of Employees - Research Paper Example

Electronic Surveillance of Employees Introduction To keep personal confidential information of a person intact and should not be disclosed to any other irrelevant person shall come under the purview of Privacy. The disclosure of such information may cause emotional distress to a person whose information is kept in confidence. In order to monitor the activities of a person or place to detect discreet activities through electronic devices like cameras, video cameras, tape recorders, microphones and wire taps come under the category of surveillance through electronic means (Lyon, 1994). The identified instruments can be utilized in a competent court of law as evidence against violators. Multinational Corporations and corporations of repute use electronic surveillance system to ensure foolproof security and safety within their administrative jurisdiction. 1- An employee can expect privacy at least in those places where hidden cameras or microphones are not fitted such as kitchen, dining room, washroom, smoking corner or petty stationary stores. Employees should know what is permissible and what is not permissible for them in accordance with employer’s privacy policy. Initially, the employer and the employee must have signed the document of privacy policy to be complied in letter and spirit by the stakeholders. In fact, the employee has given the liberty or the rights to monitor his/her activities whether his/her activities are purely professional or personal. Non-compliance of privacy policy surely invites the displeasure of the management. Issuance of oral or written warning in this respect is inevitable. Such acts at the level of an employee are treated as breach of contract of the policy in question (Mishra & Crampton, 1998). If it is established that the employee is a perpetual violator of the privacy policy in vogue, he/she may disqualify for future employment. According to management point of view, if such activities should not curb in the bud, they invite other colleagues to follow the footsteps, which one cannot be afforded to continue as far as the discipline of an organization is concerned. To maintain the discipline, the employer may dismiss or terminate the services of its employee for not complying with the instructions (Stanton, 2000). In the United States of America, Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA) 1986 has given the rights to the employers to monitor job-related conversations of its employees. By virtue of this act, employers enjoy complete freedom to listen incoming and outgoing calls. It hardly takes a minute or two to decide whether the calls so received or dispatched are personal or job related. With this freedom employer can measure the employee’s sincerity and integrity with the company besides his/her professional competence. The prerogative to differentiate the incoming and outgoing calls of employees still lies with the employer and not with the employee (Lyon, 1994). 2- In this modern age and time, one cannot deny the benefits of technological advancement to prevent any unpleasant situation. By dint of computer technology, it is easy to monitor the activities of any employee by the employer at his/her workplace even at a remote location. Many of the employers allow their employees to have an access on the social sites of Internet. To keep the company environment friendly, the employer should provide space at work place for a chat where one can not disturb him or their conversation may not come out of the space to invite others attention (Mishra & Crampton, 1998). This will definitely improve the performance of a company since unnecessary strictness on the employees may have an adverse impact on their job related activities. We cannot deny the fact that “Happy laborers work more”. To create an ideal atmosphere, the MNCs and the Corporations of well repute call periodical meetings of their employees to maintain a friendly and cordial relationship with them and to hear the problems that are in their way to accomplish the task. They also receive their innovative ideas/feedback about their products to improve company’s performance (Lyon, 1994). Their constructive comments on the ability of management to deliver should be welcomed if it is beneficial for the organization. 3- Under the US privacy law in practice, it is the absolute right of Herman, being an employer to keep an eye on the sales people to assess their loyalty with their institution and honesty with their profession in respect of newly introduced brands of vehicles. The sales people are the front liner staffs who come across with the people to convince them to buy their products. In many car manufacturing companies, sales people are involved in leaking the company’s sales strategy before launching of the product. This defeats the purpose of selling product at opportune time determined by the manufacturer and to achieve the desired targets (Mishra & Crampton, 1998). The car manufacturing company has every right to utilize its electronic surveillance gadget to monitor the professional activities rather than personal activities. The law in vogue permits the employer to monitor the job related activities to measure the performance in accordance with job description. Again, it is the discretion of an employer and not the employee (Stanton, 2000). 4- Employers and employee should strictly abide by the terms of privacy policy contract concerning the protection of privacy rights of employers and the employee at workplace. Non-compliance of the agreed terms of privacy policy amounts to loosing the job besides other penal action. However, the supreme court of America has taken it the other way round in the case of Wheaton v Peters (Stanton & Barnes-Farrell, 1996). It greatly emphasized the right of an individual privacy by mentioning that defendants ask nothing, wants nothing except the right to let him be alone until violated the rights of the others. The Supreme Court of America heard the case of wire tapping wherein the right of privacy of an individual clearly defined (Lyon, 1994). 5- The presence of Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 prevents intercepting electronic communications. However, under the mentioned act business communication is acceptable. The monitoring of an employee although permissible but may create conflicts amongst employees and employers relating to privacy interest. The employer may be accountable under law of tort for undermining the privacy of his/her employee. Employees must have ample grounds for tort action (Mishra & Crampton, 1998). If an employer hints that monitoring is the requirement of his/her legitimate and significant business then the court my put aside the weight of employee. Under the circumstances, court has no other option but to consider the less intrusive alternatives. To further protect, an employer has to inform the employees that they are subject to electronic surveillance system (Stanton, 2000). Regarding innocent third parties i.e. customers should be intimated that their conversations could be monitored for which they have to give their consent. The right of employer to monitor the activities of an employee at work place is legal by all counts. This has empowered employer to pursue wiretapping law of Virginia. According to the Virginian law, at least one person should know about such recordings. The permission to do so by the competent court of law amounts to legalizes their action. However, the competent court of law in America, in most of its recent decisions upheld the right of privacy of an employee, under specific circumstances, such as hidden camera should not be placed at a place, which may affect the privacy of an individual (Mishra & Crampton, 1998). Conclusion From the above, it is clearly indicated that American laws do not prevent anybody or organization to undertake video monitoring of an employee, even the employee does not know about his/her consent being monitored. After the debacle of 9/11in America, Electronic surveillance is badly needed in and around the world. To maintain law and order, security and safety of strategic assets in the United States of America and its collation partners against war on terrors. This also requires in those countries that are in league with US in connection with war on terror. Now the President of US, Congressmen, judicial and military hierarchy and law enforcement agencies are greatly benefiting from said surveillance (Lyon, 1994). Even the private and public sector organizations are aware of the importance of effective usage of electronic gadgets for the safety and security of their shopping plazas, residential precious apartments, underground parking lot, hospitals and banks. The US law permits above functions. References Lyon, D. (1994). The Electronic Eye: The Rise of the Surveillance Society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Mishra J.M., & Crampton, S.M. (1998). Employee Monitoring: Privacy in the workplace? S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, 63 (3), 4-15. Stanton, J. M. (2000). Traditional and Electronic Monitoring from an Organizational Justice Perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15, 129-147. Stanton, J. M. & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (1996). Effects of electronic performance monitoring on personal control, task satisfaction and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 738-745. Read More