Scribd
Upload
45 views

Questions

1. Management's need for employee performance information can cross into privacy issues. Laws regulate employee monitoring, like with emails containing employee data subject to location-based laws. 2. Current and new employees should be informed before monitoring and have acknowledged monitoring policies in writing. Notices should also be posted when employees log on acknowledging systems are not private. 3. Proposed 1991 legislation would restrict electronic employee monitoring, not allowing monitoring of experienced employees or using data as the sole evaluation basis. Employers could be fined for violations.

Uploaded by

Nobel Islam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
45 views

Questions

1. Management's need for employee performance information can cross into privacy issues. Laws regulate employee monitoring, like with emails containing employee data subject to location-based laws. 2. Current and new employees should be informed before monitoring and have acknowledged monitoring policies in writing. Notices should also be posted when employees log on acknowledging systems are not private. 3. Proposed 1991 legislation would restrict electronic employee monitoring, not allowing monitoring of experienced employees or using data as the sole evaluation basis. Employers could be fined for violations.

Uploaded by

Nobel Islam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Questions:

1. When does Management’s need for information about employee


performance cross over the line and interfere with an employee’s right to
privacy?
At present employee privacy can be highly regulated, making employee monitoring much more
challenging to conduct legally. For example, emails are electronic communications that contain
employee data and, therefore, are subject to a host of international laws depending on the
location of the workers involved.
Current employees, as well as new hires, should be informed of the monitoring before it has
implemented. Also, a company should have "a written policy, post it where employees will see
it, distribute it to workers, and have them acknowledge in writing that they received a copy of the
policy and that they understand it". Notices should also be posted when employees log onto the
computer that requires employees to acknowledge that they understand that the system and email
are not private and will be audited. Employees should be informed that employee passwords do
not guarantee privacy.
Senator Paul Simon and Representative Pat Williams proposed legislation in 1991 that "would
severely restrict, and in some circumstances prohibit, employers, including the federal
government, from electronically monitoring employees. This bill is termed "The Privacy for
Consumers and Workers Act" and this Act considering the following issues-
 Data collected could not be used as the "sole basis" for evaluating employees or setting
production goals.
 Employers would not be allowed to monitor workers with five or more years of
experience on the job.
 Employees who have worked between 60 days and five years could be monitored only if
chosen at random and notified in writing at least 24 hours in advance of the date and time
of the monitoring, which would be limited to two hours a week.
 The legislation would not cover workers employed for less than 60 days.
 Employers who violate the act would be fined $10,000 for each violation.

2. Explain any action by Management acceptable as long as employees are


notified ahead of time that they will be monitored?

Employers have legitimate reasons, and increasingly useful tools, to lawfully monitor employee
conduct which takes place outside of the traditional four walls of the workplace. In making
monitoring decisions, employers must respect employees' constitutional, common-law, statutory,
and sometimes contractual rights to limit monitoring. Of course, with monitoring as with
anything else, just because you can do it, does not mean you should do it. The authors can help
you weigh the costs, benefits and risks of a monitoring decision. 
Employers have the technological means, and occasionally the inclination, to find out what
workers are doing on their own time. However, your right to monitor your employees conduct
off the job and make decisions based on that conduct is limited. If your investigation or questions
invade an employee's right to privacy, you might end up in court. Balancing approach often
applies to private information. Generally speaking, an employer may not inquire about or
otherwise obtain facts about employees' private lives.
For example,- an employer may not ask employees about their romantic relationships or sexual
likes and dislikes.
Courts and legislatures have created some specific rules for certain types of private, off-duty
activities.
Employees of government and public entities have a constitutional right to privacy that protects
them from most employer monitoring of, or even inquiring about, their off-the-job conduct. For
public employers, then, this type of monitoring is mainly off-limits.
In the private sector, several laws prohibit employers from intruding into their employees' lives
outside of work. Some state constitutions specifically provide for a right to privacy, which
prevents private employers from looking into their employees' off-duty activity. Some states,
including California, have laws prohibiting employers from taking any job-related action against
a worker based on that worker's lawful conduct off the job.
Employers can monitor real-time activities on company email server systems, such as the
recipient email addresses an employee is using. For example, to protect customer data, financial
sector companies often set up alerts to notify the employer when an employee sends an email to
a Gmail or Yahoo email account address.

3. Discuss do you believe there is a difference between monitoring an


employee's work and non-work behaviour? Defend your position.
Yes, it’s a difference between monitoring an employee's work and non-work behaviour.
Workplace monitoring is the positive sign for both employee and employers due to it involve
with entity productivity as well as employee efficiency. Employers have the right to monitor
your activities at work. All of these forms of monitoring are covered by the law on data
protection; however, the law does not protect employees from monitoring in the workplace.
Instead, it sets down rules about the circumstances and how monitoring should be carried out.
On the other hand, employee monitoring ethics tells you how you can monitor your employees
and their work without invading their privacy. This way, you can establish a transparent
employee monitoring system, creating a safe and productive work environment.
Employee monitoring is legal; however, there are some stipulations that must be followed in
some states. Of course, many organization comply with the macro-level ethical paradigm. The
mention of this is to highlight the ethical boundaries of decisions as codified into law.
Whatever using monitoring software has been field-proven to be a very effective method if a
healthy balance between business interests and the privacy of employees is maintained.

You might also like