Employee Monitoring: Ethical Issues in the Organization
[Student’s Name]
[Institution Title]
[Date of Submission]
Employee Monitoring: Ethical Issues in the Organization
Introduction
A nation’s department of labor and employment and those tasked to protect and safeguard the rights and interest of employees are always on the lookout of the different factors which could compromise the rights and welfare of regular workers against abuse and maltreatment. Thus, organizations are being mandated and required to comply with the different standards and norms related to workforce behavior and protocols. Among these protocols involve ethical issues which require prompt attention. This paper will concentrate on naming one common ethical issue in the organization which relates to the topic of employee privacy and the employer’s resource utilization—employee monitoring. The objective of this paper is to understand the principle of ethical behavior and its impact on the organization and business process.
Organizational Ethics and Employee Monitoring
Business ethics, most commonly referred to as organizational ethics is an integral component of any organization. Ethics guides the conduct of the people working within the organization. In addition, business ethics is also an essential aspect of the decision-making process. In fact, organizations formulate a personalized code of ethics which is suited to its goals and objectives. Organizational ethics also varies depending on the stimulus—both internal and external. Thus, the response of the employees and employers varies depending on several factors like circumstances for which an action or decision has been based or patterned.
In the case of employee monitoring, both employees and the organization have a different perspective on this particular company policy. For most companies, employee monitoring is simply a way to ensure productivity, and appropriate use of company resources (Yerby, 2013). On the other hand, there are employees who see this practice as an invasion of their privacy (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2016). There are several ways for companies to monitor their employees’ activities. Technology has allowed for this practice to be massively implemented in the workforce.
According to Johnathan Yerby (2013), the availability of numerous software and hardware in the market makes employee monitoring very easy (p. 45). Among the most popular is the use of surveillance camera installed in various areas of the office. However, this approach is probably one of the oldest systems in the book. In fact, organizations nowadays are more advanced because employees can even be monitored even without their knowledge, more so, their consent. The absence of the employee’s knowledge that they are being watched, listened to or monitored makes such practice ethically questionable. Listening to phone conversations, personal access to employees’ computer network and terminals, and social media monitoring are just among the practices that raise concerns particularly relating to privacy (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2016).
Based on the “Electronic Communications Privacy Act”, listening to phone conversations without prior notice, especially calls considered as business-related is not allowed as specified under 18 USC 2510, et. seq. (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2016). However, Federal Law ensures to protect employees’ personal calls. Monitoring or listening to personal conversations should be immediately dropped. Nevertheless, employees assume the risk of being monitored especially when they use company phones especially designated for company use only.
Conclusion
Overall, ethical issues have dire consequences for organizations. If organizations continue to implement practices that violate the rights of their employees, they may run the risk of being sued as with the case of Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577, 583 (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2016). Under this particular situation, L.M. Berry & Company was brought into trial by Carmie Watkins for violation of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2520, specifically citing Title III, or the Federal Wiretapping Statute (Justia US Law, 1983). Employees feel violated when organizations become self-centered that it goes beyond the point of violating an individual’s basic rights.
References
Justia US Law. (1983, May 2). Carmie Watkins, Plaintiff-appellant, v. L.m. Berry & Company, et al., Defendants-appellees, 704 F.2d 577 (11th Cir. 1983). Retrieved from Justia US Law Website: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/704/577/107387/
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. (2016, January). Fact Sheet 7: Workplace Privacy and Employee Monitoring. Retrieved from Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Website: https://www.privacyrights.org/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring
Yerby, J. (2013). Legal and ethical issues of employee monitoring. Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 44-55. Retrieved from Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management.
