As in this case, substantial evidence does not exist, as it is uncertain what the injured party was wearing at the time of the accident, thus the court should set aside the first decision. Question

Such a measure clearly goes against the National Labor Relations Act which "extends rights to most private sector employees and their employers, stating that employees have the right to form, join, support or assist unions, also known as labor organizations, who may bargain collectively with the employer on the employees' behalf seeking to modify wages or working conditions" ("What are my rights as an...employee,...employer,...union?" 2007, NLRB). Employers are not permitted to harass or discourage employees from joining unions. Threatening employees publicly regarding union membership is clearly threatening behavior in this instance.

Question

This case centers on what constitutes a reasonable expectation of privacy. Murray was working in a public location, at his place of employment, not his home, thus his contention that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy and should not be monitored falls flat. "Except in instances of wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping, there are no specific laws prohibiting many forms of surveillance, such as cameras. The only real concern is with common-law privacy rights...a key issue will be he individual's expectation of privacy. For example, a hidden camera in a restaurant reception area is OK -- there is no expectation of privacy in such a public setting. However, as surveillance moves into more private areas, where an individual may have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the issue becomes more problematic. Where surveillance is not secretive, but rather is out in the open, the basis of any claimed expectation of privacy quickly evaporates" (Fitting, 1995:1).

In this instance, as the employee was working out 'on the floor' and not, for example, in a restroom or a concealed area, his expectations of privacy are not reasonable, thus his employers were within their rights to monitor him. Murray is no different than an individual being monitored...

However, Murray may have a case that he has a reasonable expectation to privacy in his locker, unless he was explicitly informed that employee lockers were regarded as company property and were subject to unwarranted searches at any time. Otherwise, Murray's private locker could be interpreted as an area where he had a reasonable expectation of privacy, and thus cannot be searched without a court warrant.
Works Cited

Chapter: Lie Detector Tests." (Sept 2005). EPPA Compliance. Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/eppa.htm

Faegre & Benson. (2007)."Religious Discrimination and Religious Accommodation in the Workplace." Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://www.faegre.com/articles/article_2113.aspx

Fitting, Bet. (18 Sept 1995). "Smile... You're on corporate camera." CNY Business

Journal (1994-95). Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3635/is_199509/ai_n8730248

Keith, Martin & Rogers. (2004). "Fields Excavating, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor,

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission." Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=6th&navby=case&no=033769

Sostowski, Kristin D. (1 Dec 2006). "Recent Federal Court Decisions on Discoverability of Employee Email Communications Highlight Need for Employers to Implement and Enforce Electronic Communications Policies." The Employment and Labor Law Alert. Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://www.gibbonslaw.com/news_publications/articles.php?action=display_publication&publication_id=2094

Title IIV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act." (2007). EEOC. Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html

What are my rights as a...employee...employer...union?" (2007). NLRB: National

Labor Rights Board. Retrieved 24 Jul 2007 at http://www.nlrb.gov/workplace_rights/i_am_new_to_this_website/what_are_my_rights.aspx