1. Explain where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy in the workplace.
In various organizations, employees are entitled to certain rights. The right to privacy is one of the most significant rights an employee can enjoy at the workplace. Privacy has commonly been defined as the right to personal space. The right grants an individual employee total control over his/her information without intrusion or interference. The code of ethics in numerous organizations have emphasized on organizations appreciating the need for fair information practices including privacy. However, the privacy of an employee depends on the kind of information he is handling and company policy.
An employee handling his own private information that does not relate to the organization should be given some level of privacy. For instance, personal mobile conversation should not be monitored. The surveillance of the employee should only be limited to the use of office equipment as opposed to private equipment. In numerous occasions, employees engage in conversations or activities that require high degrees of privacy. Such information may include contacting a personal bank manager and exchanging financial details or a female employee having a chat with her husband. The employee is required to have privacy because he is dealing with sensitive information.
Another instance where an employee can have reasonable amounts of privacy is when the organization has a policy prohibiting the intrusion of employee privacy. The company may provide in the job contract that it will not intrude the space of the employee and as such should honor the contract to the latter. A company may not allow the use of camera surveillance in offices and such grant employee some privacy. Going against the company policy is an offence that can result in a lawsuit. In such a case, the employee is protected by the company policy or job contract and is entitled to privacy.
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 enclosed office.
Open offices can be described as office layouts in which there is a large number of employees are working from the same office floor. The office lacks partitions such as doors glasses and walls. Employees have an easy access to each other and there exists little privacy in the office. Conversations can be overhead and employees can access private information with ease because there is sharing of equipment such as computers and telephones. In a scenario, an employee may be expecting a call and the call may be picked by a colleague. The employee may stumble upon sensitive information from the caller hence limiting privacy.
Closed offices are partitioned and employees have limited access to each other in such offices. Each employee has their own offices hence improved privacy. Unlike the open office layout, a closed office has no duplication of resources such as computers and telephones. Each employee has his own resources and can protect private information against intrusion. Conversions are rarely heard unless an equipment is installed in the office.
An enclosed office does not guarantee privacy to the employee because the office is limited to the use of electronic surveillance gadgets. A company may install monitoring equipment such as surveillance cameras that will allow monitoring of employ activities hence reducing privacy. In some instances, the company has the access to enclosed offices and may access employee’s private information. The company may have extra keys to the offices and may access them any at any moment. The only guarantee to privacy is information protection relating to company policies prohibiting intrusion of information. In such a case, an employee’s privacy is protected by company policies and regulations.
3. Explain if Herman’s need to know whether his salespersons are honest is a sufficient ground for utilizing electronic surveillance.
According to Herman, he wanted to change the reputation of car salesmen by monitoring their work behavior and making appropriate changes. He had the impression that salesmen were not trustworthy and that they always had malicious intentions in their car dealings. Such a reputation degrades the image of the company and results in the loss of customers and declining sales. In the long run the company may be forced to discontinue operations due to lack of customers. In some instances, the company may be sued by a customer for being conned of their money. There are other reasons that led to the use of electronic method and Herman is afraid to be offensive by telling the salesperson instructions.
Herman’s basis for monitoring salespersons honesty using electronic surveillance are not sufficient because his claims are based on rumors and that electronic surveillance does not provide comprehensive information hence unreliable. Herman claims that salespersons are not honest based on what he heard or read from. However, he does not give an instance in which a customer is complaining that he has been duped by a salesperson working with his firm. Herman has been running Fade In possibly using Sulka as his salesperson. In addition, the meeting between the client and the salesperson was conducted in an enclosed office requiring privacy.
Using an electronic surveillance gadget is an unreliable method of measuring honesty among the salespersons. The method is only useful when the listener around it. For instance, Herman was able to hear Sulka when he was wearing the earphones but could not record the information when he left for Sulka’s office. There are other effective methods of measuring the honesty of the salesperson including collection of customer views on the satisfaction derived from using the services of the company.
4. Explain to what extent an employer can engage in electronic surveillance of employees.
Employees engage in electronic surveillance because of various reasons. Such reasons for the use of electronic surveillance have to consider the tangible implications on the business organization. An employer has to engage in the use of electronic surveillance if the company records poor performance over a given period of time. When a company records poor performance, the management has to identify the root of the problem. In most cases, the employee is the first person to be questioned about the poor performance. The company may monitor working habits of employees in order to identify poor working behavior such as absenteeism and wastage of time. Monitoring the employees will assist the employer in evaluating the performance of the employee.
A company may engage in electronic surveillance to the extent of providing security to the assets and information kept by the company. Company assets are under the constant threat of being mishandled by the employees. Some employees may develop the tendency of mismanaging company or vandalizing company assets. For instance, a staff member may be using the company’s telephone to make his private calls. This is against the policy of the company and electronic surveillance aids the company in monitoring the use of company resources.
The employer may also utilize electronic surveillance when it is the policy of the company to monitor activities within the company. This gives the employer a legal base on using the electronic surveillance method. The law of the company may require that some of the activities within the business be monitored closely. There have been numerous legal tussles involving privacy and in most cases the company has emerged the winner. This is because companies are backed by the law to monitor their workers so long as they are engaging in company activities.
5. Explain to what extent the inclusion of innocent, unaware third-parties in such surveillance determine whether it is legal.
The use of electronic surveillance by a company is not only limited to employees but can also include third parties. Third parties to a company may include clients and other visitors. A third party may be included in the electronic surveillance if the company is making efforts to make the company a secure place. There has been an increase in the number of unidentified individuals breaking into company premises. This has compelled business organizations to tighten security measures including the use of electronic surveillance. A third party may be included in electronic surveillance if the method is used as a security measure within the organization. Thus everyone within the company premises is closely monitored. It is thus important that a third party be not aware that their movements are monitored.
The company may include a third party in electronic surveillance if the party will not be involved in sharing sensitive information. For instance, the client may be making an inquiry whereby there will be no exchange of sensitive information such as personal contacts between the customer and the company. In such a case there will be no basis of violation of privacy rights because no private has been exchanged between the two parties.
A company is justified to include an innocent unknowing third party if the company is sharing the information with other entities. For instance, the Auto Dealer Company would be justified in including Mrs. Drummand in the electronic surveillance if Herman was sharing information about her with other companies such as creditors or banks. The company may be required to collect important information from the customer to be used in making a decision such as whether to offer credit terms or not. In such cases, the third party is not allowed to know that the company is collecting information about her.
