Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

Abstract

This essay seeks to analyze and present a critical interpretation of workplace privacy

regarding employee technology use tracking. It quickly defines privacy and what it implies from

a legal and philosophical standpoint before discussing the technology used to gather and monitor

data. The Fourth Amendment, the Electronic Communications Act of 1986, and legislators'

initiatives to improve employee privacy in electronic communications are all explored in the

article, as are the laws and sources that control employer monitoring. It will also address

situations where employers and organizations employed ethical decision-making procedures to

monitor and/or infringe on employees' privacy, as well as the outcomes of these acts, within the

boundaries of certain elements. Finally, an overall appraisal of the topic is provided, with a focus

on the ethics involved and the employer's role in creating policy.

Privacy as an Ethical Concept

If it is plausible to claim that the development of Internet technology is changing human

behavior in ways that are both exponential and pervasive, it is then inevitable that this same

technology has generated immense and ongoing issues regarding commerce; specifically, that

employees are subject to personal scrutiny to an unprecedented extent simply by their immersion

in online activities. The employee's Internet use is then potentially under the purview of the

employer because the computer currently serves the firm in an essential capacity. This can lead

to a range of issues, from an employee using a computer to improperly change data to the

employer improperly prying into an employee's private online communications and activities

(Kelly, 2018). As law and policy try to ethically resolve the resulting conflicts, the widespread

and rapid use of contemporary technology has generated a field of complicated ethical and legal

concerns.

The Right to Privacy at Work overtime, value of privacy has increased, and in recent

years, it has become vitally important to handle it properly. Companies now pay more attention

to the talks of their employees since defaulting organizations are subject to severe legal

proceedings. Due to the employee's right to privacy, the employer's endeavor to monitor

employees' activities doesn't always go as well as it could. Recent court disputes involving the
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

right of employees to workplace privacy are largely attributable to the digital revolution in

company communication, including emails and memoranda. All forms of digital communication,

as well as Internet use at work, are now subject to surveillance thanks to technological

advancements. Although there are concerns from employees regarding this, the law protects

employers. However, higher privacy limits are allowed for other workplace activities like private

rooms and secret discussions. However, when found, behaviors like substance usage could result

in addiction tests (Kelly, 2018).

Amazingly, technology has advanced to the point that businesses looking to keep tabs on

employee activities no longer require any special tools, simply because people make so much of

themselves available to Internet users as information. In actuality, the business has not been slow

to benefit from this informational gold mine, particularly concerning employment. The number

of organizations frequently keeping an eye on their employee’s social media activity is growing,

and at the same time, more organizations are firing or penalizing employees for non-work-related

content that is deemed inappropriate or seen as demeaning to the organization (CBS News,

2018).

Employers today have access to a wide range of tools that allow them to keep an eye on

employees' presence, activity, and behavior. Some software programs keep track of employee

computer task speed and accuracy and provide thorough performance reports. Other software

keeps track of how long a worker is away from their computer or otherwise not engaged in their

work. Additionally, these same programs often enable employers to read hard drives, access

practically every website that employees visit, and read emails and messages posted on social

media (Workplace Privacy and Technology Labor & Employment, n.d.). In essence, Internet use
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

always leaves footprints, and the tools needed to watch and keep an eye on where employees go

online and what they do there are just as readily available as the Internet itself.

Laws and Policies

There cannot be a long-standing rule in place that covers the various privacy challenges

the Internet brings given how lately it has become a pervasive force. It is well known now that

the 1986 U.S. Electronic Communications Privacy Act is inevitably out-of-date. However, the

more important fact is that its fundamental principles, which were developed at a time when

business communication was mostly limited to written documents and telephone calls, safeguard

the employer's right to manage all such information. According to the Act, whenever an

employee uses any technology provided by their employer to communicate, they are waiving

their right to privacy because it is presumed that this technology would only be utilized for

business purposes and belongs exclusively to the employer. This was a legitimate way of dealing

with situations in such a small area at the time, and the only possible infraction of the current

norms was the employee making a personal call without permission. Similarly, the Act was

intended to protect an organization's private information and hence relied on boundaries clearly

distinguishing between the professional and the personal (Privacy | U.S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, n.d.).

However, modernizing this type of address fails since the distinctions between

professional and personal actions blur in the enormous expanse of Internet communication. As a

result, the legislation favoring the employer's right to examine employee activities clashes with

today's reality of employees engaging in some level of personal engagement while at work. This

is likely the most serious and onerous challenge confronting privacy regulation; in simple terms,

technology allows employees to handle personal affairs momentarily at any time and in any
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

location, and there is no business code enough to manage the resulting shift in office behavior. In

some ways, the personal has become a component of the professional, and this is the reality that

law must face. Senators Mike Lee and Tom Leahy have proposed changes to the 1986 Act to

clarify and promote individual privacy rights in circumstances of employer monitoring. The

amendments would primarily require that employees be alerted immediately when law

enforcement accesses email and files and that search warrants based on probable cause be

obtained beforehand (Information Management Journal, 2018). It should be highlighted that

these regulations apply only in extreme circumstances of suspected wrongdoing and do not

address the underlying issue of employer intrusion.

Each organization's obligation to dictate a specific Internet policy is the only sensible

way of dealing with such an innately variable issue, if only because the norms of permissible

behavior of one firm may differ substantially from another. As a result, the law is hampered

because no law can successfully comprehend such a broad spectrum of interpretation and

application. Companies confront challenges even when policies are fully in place, most

frequently due to the novelty of the arrangements themselves as necessary, as well as employee

perspectives that differ from management. The employees in the well-known 1999 case of The

New York Times firing or disciplining over 20 employees for what it considered grossly

inappropriate email exchanges maintained that the obscene or pornographic nature of the emails

as perceived by the company was intended only as humor. The newspaper maintained that the

emails not only had the potential for harassment but were also obviously in violation of agreed-

upon corporate policy, which had been reinforced to all staff (United States Department of

Justice, 2019). This demonstrates that, at some point, corporations must construct their laws, and

communicate them in such a way that employees can knowingly assent, disagree, or leave. In
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

this scenario, it doesn't matter whether either party has the right perspective; what counts is that a

policy was in place, and the employees broke it, regardless of how harmless their intentions may

have been. This type of policy establishes necessary boundaries around the mutable aspects of

employee privacy, waiver of privacy, and general behavior with technology at work.

Modern Concerns and Ethical Components

As previously mentioned, privacy is currently a highly malleable good that is firmly

ingrained in the prevalent beliefs based on traditional methods. These models predate modern

law; according to common law cases throughout history, actions that "unreasonably intrude" on

another person's seclusion are tortious or litigious, even if the other person has consented in

advance. Only consent given at the precise time of the intrusion avoids this. To put it another

way, the impact of the mass surrender of privacy brought on by technology has been obstructed

since the emphasis has been placed so heavily on individual privacy (Attaran et al, 2019). To

what extent can privacy be protected, or seen as deserving of protection, in a world where the

traditional definition and value of the concept are immeasurably altered, and because of a general

disregard for it by the population insisting upon it, may then be the question raised by

policymakers, legislators, and employers. Additionally, there is the crucial question of culture,

which shapes the ethics that are basic to the problem and, as a result, the policies about almost all

privacy intrusion-related issues. Simply put, a society's ethics are built on its cultural ideas, and it

has long been noticed that European law supports individual protection significantly more than

American law does. Derogatory or embarrassing celebrity news items in the media are

consistently determined to be illegal. A more startling paradox may be seen in the U.S., where

business is increasingly at odds with employee privacy issues.

However, it may become clearer that there can be no reliance on conventional

conceptions the more complicated the conflicts become. Even the typically contentious concept

of permission as a right waiver is essentially irrelevant in the context of modern technology. Its

significance is limited when it comes to privacy and this is because the previously mentioned

feature of the private has given way to the public. In this constantly changing environment, it is

necessary to realize that previously held boundaries are no longer valid, and there is no

unquestionable right or wrong when it comes to an employer monitoring an employee's use of

technology. In plain terms, when viewed broadly, it is a wholly gray space. Consequently, the

creation of specialized policy, not federal law, is the only option that safeguards both the rights

of the employer and the privacy of the employee. Only such a unique reaction can morally

address the problem when the key components are so unstable and changing.

Conclusion

Through enabling communication at previously unheard-of, if not unimaginable, levels,

technology has and is reshaping the globe. This in turn modifies human behavior to the point that

access to it becomes usual and is thus practiced in the workplace, though inappropriately. As a

result, there is a huge problem with employers believing they have the right to control this

activity. As a result, rights and expectations become as muddled as the Internet itself. This

change is so profound that traditional ethics cannot be relied upon to set the course because they

do not apply to the new circumstances and actions. Legislation cannot, in an acceptable manner,

establish whether employer monitoring is appropriate. Only the organization and its members

can decide how to handle this situation because the rules set forth by the company give the

employee the option of abiding by them or looking for employment elsewhere. The onus must be

on the employer in the modern world to create and make plain specific technological rules since
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

only in this way can the varying ideas of privacy at the heart of these concerns be given

meaningful shape.

Reference

Attaran, M., Attaran, S., and Kirkland, D. 2019. "The Need for Digital Workplace: Increasing

Workforce Productivity in the Information Age," International Journal of Enterprise

Information Systems (15:1), pp. 1-23

CBS News. (2018, August 14). Employee privacy at stake as surveillance technology evolves.

[Link]. [Link]

technology-evolves/

‌Kelly K. D., Hays B. I. 2018. Biometric timeclocks may be a ticking time bomb for

employers. Employee Relations Law Journal, 43: 39-42.

Privacy | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d.). [Link].

[Link]

U.S. Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Proposed. (2018). Information

Management Journal, 47 (3), 10

United States Department of Justice. (2019, April 3). Case summaries. [Link].

[Link]
Ethics Paper: Privacy in the Workplace

‌Workplace privacy and technology Labor & Employment. (n.d.). Porter Wright Morris & Arthur

LLP. Retrieved June 9, 2023, from

[Link]

technology/