NEGATIVE – EMPLOYMENT – WORKPLACE SPYING 305

NEGATIVE — EMPLOYMENT — WORKPLACE SPYING 305

WORKPLACE SPYING ONLY TAKES PLACE WHEN THERE IS A GOOD JUSTIFICATION

VAST MAJORITY OF WORKPLACE SURVEILLANCE TAKES PLACE AFTER THERE IS AN EMPLOYEE TRANSGRESSION

Liz Stevens, KNIGHT RIDDER NEWS SERVICE Staff writer, The San Diego Union-Tribune, October 6, 1999, SECTION: NEWS Pg. A-1 TITLE: Careful! Your boss may be eavesdropping; Two-thirds of U.S. businesses spy on employees, study finds // acs-EE2001

"Employers, for the most part, unless they are voyeurs, don't set out to spy on their employees," says Hubbartt, author of "The New Battle Over Workplace Privacy." Most snooping ensues, he suggests, only after an employer gets wind of an employee transgression.

BUSINESSES HAVE SOUND REASONS FOR WATCHING OVER EMPLOYEES

Businesses have lots of good reasons to monitor workers: to deter workplace crime, to protect business secrets and to make sure, for instance, that employees aren't calling Timbuktu on the company dime.

Businesses concerned about workplace violence often use video surveillance for security purposes, and those worried about the Internet sites that employees are surfing at work can buy software that watches employees' screens.

FAILURE TO MONITOR EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOR CAN BE A DISASTER FOR COMPANIES

Not monitoring can sometimes cost companies a bunch. After Chevron Corp. employees sent a sexually harassing e-mail through the company system, Chevron was forced to pay four plaintiffs $2.2 million. Had the company been monitoring employees' e-mail, it might have caught the problem before it went to court.

EMPLOYERS DIG DEEPER INTO PRIVATE LIVES BECAUSE OF HEALTH CARE EXPENSES

Greg Dawson; The San Diego Union-Tribune, March 27, 2000, SECTION: BUSINESS;Pg. C-1 TITLE: Freedom of speech shares workplace with the freedom to be fired; it's a ... Constitutional Catch-22 // acs-VT2001

"Employers are getting deeper and deeper into their employees' private lives," the ACLU's Maltby says. "Generally the reason relates to health care. The most common reason people are fired for off-duty behavior is smoking cigarettes.

Thirty states have laws restricting an employer's right to fire a worker for legal off-duty behavior, such as drinking or smoking. "But if you're fired for smoking pot in your living room, there's not a state in the country that will help you," Maltby says.

EMPLOYEE MONITORING IS NEEDED FOR PERFORMANCE REVIEW

EVE TAHMINCIOGLU, St. Petersburg Times, February 01, 1999, SECTION: BUSINESS; COVER STORY; Pg. 11 TITLE: BUSINESS TOOL OR BIG BROTHER? // acs-EE2001

+Performance review. Customer service personnel often are taped or listened to while fielding calls from customers. The tapes are reviewed by supervisors and employees to see that customers are treated courteously but expeditiously, questions are answered correctly and products are sold effectively.

EMPLOYEE MONITORING IS NEEDED FOR LEGAL COMPLIANCE

EVE TAHMINCIOGLU, St. Petersburg Times, February 01, 1999, SECTION: BUSINESS; COVER STORY; Pg. 11 TITLE: BUSINESS TOOL OR BIG BROTHER? // acs-EE2001

+Legal compliance. In regulated industries - brokerages, insurance firms and real estate sales - taping conversations gives both the company and the consumer some legal protection in terms of what advice is given and what agreements are reached.

EMPLOYEE MONITOING IS NEEDED FOR COST CONTROL

EVE TAHMINCIOGLU, St. Petersburg Times, February 01, 1999, SECTION: BUSINESS; COVER STORY; Pg. 11 TITLE: BUSINESS TOOL OR BIG BROTHER? // acs-EE2001

+Cost control. Employees who surf the Internet or dial "900" numbers can end up costing companies money in lost time and high telephone bills.

THE FTC HAS SUGGESTED REMOVING SOME PRIVACY PROTECTIONS TO PROTECT EMPLOYERS FROM SABOTAGE

Rod Dixon, an attorney at the U.S. Department of Education, "With Nowhere to Hide: Workers are Scrambling for Privacy in the Digital Age," Journal of Technology Law and Policy, Spring 1999, 4 J. Tech. L. & Pol'y 1, EE2001-JGM, P.13

Interestingly, the Commission found that employees and other insiders provide the most frequent avenue of attack to an organization's information infrastructure. Quite remarkably, the Commission concluded that the Federal government, as an employer, has been better able than the private sector to protect against employee sabotage as a result of having the legal authority to conduct background investigations of employees and applicants. n38 To assist other employers, the Commission recommended changes in certain fair employment and privacy right restrictions that currently preclude private sector employers and others from lawfully adopting practices that could allegedly assure employers that the company's computer systems and information infrastructure were adequately protected from sabotage by disgruntled or rogue employees. n39