Article I, section 7 of the Washington Constitution provides that "No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law." The Fourth Amendments to the US Constitution similarly protects the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." Both rules apply ONLY to governmental entity intrusion into individual privacy and DO NOT APPLY to private employers. - taken from Find Law website published 2008-03-26.
I understand that the Washington Constitution protects us regarding privacy and although the Fourth amendment gives leniency to private sectors, it does not excuse them of the unethical behavior that would arise from monitoring emails of an employee or asking personal questions on the evaluation forms that's not related to improving health, safety and protection on the workplace. Since the development of information technology, ethical dilemmas also rose up. The law have not caught up with the rapid change in technology. This forced a lot of employers to hide under the fourth amendment right which exclude private entity from the employees individual privacy rights. However, I do understand the invasion of privacy on the employers point of view that by monitoring their employees actions and performances that is suspected of misuse of company property such as computers, equipment, etc. is necessary.
If the employee does not recognize boundaries between what's ethical in the workplace and separate what is personal, they open the door to invasion of privacy. For example, if employee access sites that are not related to the scope of work such as dating sites, social networks, etc., they will most likely be subjected to suspicion. Employers will have a reason to invade privacy to protect their business, its workforce and its identity. We can only claim the right of privacy if we know we did not give them the reason to invade our rights.
In my opinion, the way I could protect my right is not to give them any reason to suspect me of unethical behavior. I will follow the company ethics as long as their company ethics are in line with at least the basic principles of right and wrong.
I understand that the Washington Constitution protects us regarding privacy and although the Fourth amendment gives leniency to private sectors, it does not excuse them of the unethical behavior that would arise from monitoring emails of an employee or asking personal questions on the evaluation forms that's not related to improving health, safety and protection on the workplace. Since the development of information technology, ethical dilemmas also rose up. The law have not caught up with the rapid change in technology. This forced a lot of employers to hide under the fourth amendment right which exclude private entity from the employees individual privacy rights. However, I do understand the invasion of privacy on the employers point of view that by monitoring their employees actions and performances that is suspected of misuse of company property such as computers, equipment, etc. is necessary.
If the employee does not recognize boundaries between what's ethical in the workplace and separate what is personal, they open the door to invasion of privacy. For example, if employee access sites that are not related to the scope of work such as dating sites, social networks, etc., they will most likely be subjected to suspicion. Employers will have a reason to invade privacy to protect their business, its workforce and its identity. We can only claim the right of privacy if we know we did not give them the reason to invade our rights. In my opinion, the way I could protect my right is not to give them any reason to suspect me of unethical behavior. I will follow the company ethics as long as their company ethics are in line with at least the basic principles of right and wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment