Workplace surveillance and employee privacy rights in post-9/11 security

Workplace Surveillance Memo

What is currently being done at the workplace in terms of surveillance is standard for the industry: cameras are mounted on the exteriors and interiors of the building, for the sake of safety monitoring; phone emails are stored within the workplace cloud for future reference if necessary.

Controversies

calls with customers are recorded for the sake of accountability practices; and intranet

The controversy surrounding workplace surveillance is situated within the context of the post-9/11 world and the simultaneous expansion of NSA policies. For the sake of safety and security, the surveillance of citizens was given approval by Congress in the passing of the Patriot Act -- however, not all citizens are happy with this bill and view the NSA's surveillance, for instance, as overreach and a violation of privacy. Privacy concerns are at the root of the controversies surrounding surveillance and in the workplace, privacy rights are balanced against the company's need to protect itself from harm. Thus, if a worker posts something on his or her private social media account or expresses himself in an email to a co-worker about a workplace policy, should this be grounds for termination? Would termination violate the worker's right to privacy or free speech? How is the company at risk if it does nothing? These are questions that must be considered. For the sake of safety and security, the company asks all employees to commit criticism of the workplace to non-digital exchanges, so as to ensure that such information is not exploited. Likewise, when on work premises it is asked that employee not engage in behavior that might be construed as bringing a bad image to the workplace.

Legislation

There is no federal law that prohibits a company from monitoring its workers. However, the National Labor Relations Board has prohibited companies from retaliating against employees who act in a concerted manner to achieve reform in a workplace. Thus, a company cannot terminate workers simply for organizing in the lack of a union. This is known as the Protected Concerted Act (NLRB, 2015). At the same time, there is 18 U.S. Code S. 2511 -- regarding the interception and disclosure of wire, oral or electronic communications. This law does broadly speaking apply to businesses monitoring the workplace but it does not specifically identify businesses nor prohibit monitoring of workplace communications so long as employee consent has been given, which is the case for each employee in this business upon hiring (Legal Information Institute, 2015).

Future Direction