The Right To Privacy In The Work Place

Employee privacy is one of the most controversial areas concerning personnel in the public sector. Claims of privacy abuse are measured against an employer's prerogatives in establishing workplace standards and ensuring the efficiency of administration. (Long 11-25)

Monitoring of employees in the workplace can create conflicts between employer and employee. The problems increase as technological advances change the nature of work, communication, and supervisory functions in the workplace. This conflict reconsiders the basic questions as to what is private, what is proprietary, what legal rights an employee possesses, and what are an employee's obligations and responsibilities within the sphere of employment. (Lewis 45-85)

To most, privacy is seen as need for "personal space", which is directly tied to the Fourth Amendment, which holds that, "It is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures." (Long 11-25)

Privacy in the workplace has also been asserted on the basis of First Amendment, which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." (Lewis 45-85)

The monitoring by the employer of employee conversations in lounges during breaks would definitely be regarded as a monitoring of behaviors outside the employer's sphere of interest, which is not only illegal, but also unethical. (Long 11-25)

The heightened expectation of privacy attached to oral conversations is recognized in legislation like the Federal Wiretap Act, which prohibits both private and public employers from intercepting and recording the "wire communications" of employees. It is the conversation that is protected. (Lewis 45-85)

For example, employers may use cameras to observe employees and to provide security, but providing those cameras with audio capability could violate the Wiretap Act. This is consistent with employees who tolerate surveillance cameras within their work environment for security reasons, but draw the line on any attempt to record their conversations.

This issue of privacy of conversation is commonly raised when employers terminate employees for violation of organizational policies or rules in their use of Internet or e-mail networks while on company time. Users (employees) of these networks tend to view them as mediums in which they can freely communicate without much regard for the potential consequences involved. It may include "cyber-surfing" to web sites ...