1. Explain where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy in the workplace.
Before answering the question we need to know the definition of privacy.
What is privacy? According to a book by David Jr. (2010, p 13) privacy is referred as “the
condition of being protected from unwanted access by others – either physical access, personal
information of attention. Every human being has right have privacy over their life, behavior and
background but “as above that privacy, as a right, can be overridden by another privacy (Auburn,
2000, p 103). Supporting this statement employers want to know their workers productivity and
loyalty (Halbert, 2009, p 70) and ...view middle of the document...
Explain whether it makes a difference if an employee is in an open or in an enclosed office.
“The federal wiretap law, as amended by the electronic communications privacy act 1986
(ECPA), it is illegal to intercept, disclose or access messages without authorization, would
appear to protect workers from eavesdropping” (Halbert. et. al, 2009). However there are number
of exceptions were an employer can listen the conversation of their employees. Employer can
legally monitor or wiretap the conversations in his/her office where the place is readily
accessible to general public and furthermore the law allows the employer to listen the
communication made in ordinary course of business. (Halbert. et. al, 2009).
In this case the sales person is in his office desk and trying office sale car to a customer.
His office is in an open place and he is involved in a business operation (ordinary course of
business) and his boss is listening to his conversation.
It is illegal to Herman (boss) to listen his salesman’s conversation. First conversation
was made in an office and second the conversation was based on business of the company. Even
if an employee is in a closed office the employer has right to listen the communication where
business interests such as efficiencies or legal liability are at stake.
3. Explain if Herman’s need to know whether his salespersons are honest is a sufficient ground for utilizing electronic surveillance.
Electronic surveillance is the modern technology to monitor employees. Research has
shown that by 2003, 92% of employees were conducting some form of electronic monitoring of
their employees (Halbert. et. al, 2009). Wiretapping, video surveillance, GPS satellite tracking of
cars and cell phones, e-mails and computer sweeping are the most common method of electronic
surveillance. Most of the information gathered through electronic surveillance is accurate and
with the growing competition in technology the cost is affordable for employers but there is also
drawback of electronic surveillance, in most case it records quantity than quality and if employee
know that they are being tracked it can cause psychological stress to employee. (Halbert. et. al,
2009, p 74).
In this case Herman has used wiretapping (electronic surveillance) to monitor his
employee. He is listening all the conversation that has held between the salesman and the
customer. Herman interrupts the conversation between salesman and the customer before the
deal is over.
In my opinion employee should be informed if they are recorded which may keep the
employee honest. Reputation and the profitability of the company cannot be sufficient answer to
monitor employee constantly through electronic surveillance without letting the employee know.
Furthermore Herman could use customer survey to find...