An argument against the implementation of computer monitoring in workplaces

Tompkins and Cheney refine Weick's notion of the double interact of communication and identify a double interact of control that focuses on the interaction between a supervisor and subordinate. Concerning this point some questions are likely to be significant: In this context the management in Korean firms had two strategies: To live in happiness for me means: The New York Law Journal.

Firstly, since the middle of s the democratic labor movement has pursued the traditional way of labor control in Korea, i. For example, K mart hired a team of investigators to pose as friends of other employees, have lunch with them and an occasional beer after work, offer help in moving to a new home, befriend coworkers and write reports about conversations in the workplace, even including the number of pitchers of beer ordered by each employee Schultz, These conditions include paced work, lack of involvement, reduced task variety and clarity, reduced peer social support, reduced supervisory suppoff, fear of job loss, routinized work activities and lack of control over tasks Pal et al.

Thus restricting monitoring to performance-related activities and soliciting employee input prior to the implementation of the monitoring system will contribute to perceptions of monitoring fairness.

Implementing an internet usage policy

While employees generally view monitoring as a violation of privacy and a source of unneeded job stress, monitoring continues basically unregulated because employers view it as a means to increase productivity, quality, etc. This manifests as apathy or indifference to what happens within us.

Given this result, the findings of our research presented in the first part of the chapter take on a new meaning. Monitoring should be regularly conducted so that it reflects both "good" and "bad" work performance. Nor do they quit and go home before they finish their quotas set by management.

This saved the firm about 2 million US dollars. Although there are strong eco-movements and even slogans for sustainable development, the destruction of the ecology in general does not stop. Higher levels of organizational identification and performance will result when employee input is solicited prior to the implementation of electronic monitoring systems than when monitoring systems are implemented without employee input.

What is Employee Monitoring?

Lately the firm has hired new teleworkers who cannot easily gain membership into the union. An internet usage policy would typically cover all employees who have internet access. Could an appeal to the value of privacy be the basis for an argument against the introduction of the sorts of surveillance technologies that are being introduced that is effective, even if it is not decisive?

Arguments Against Surveillance

Many union members had a fear of electronic surveillance and labor control, which stimulated conflicts at company gates. Electronic performance monitoring and job stress in telecommunications jobs. Users need to know that the violation of these boundaries will have repercussions and action will be taken against repeat offenders, as well as reporting top policy breakers, otherwise the policy will not be taken seriously.

Further, workers will have the feeling that they are being watched all of the time.

Introduction to Implementation and Monitoring

Surprisingly, it seems that arguments that emphasise the value of consent will do more to affect surveillance practices in the workplace than arguments that emphasise the values of privacy and autonomy.

The principle of State action in the fourteenth amendment gives limited constitutional privacy rights to those in the private sector.

Pressing the button of the machine by a worker operates the monitor at the same time. Periodic or random monitoring would only be allowable against employees who have worked at the company less than sixty days. There are two elements to the use of this information for the evaluation of employee performance.

Don't look now, but There is also the prevention of data leakage through socially-engineered websites as well as reducing cyberslacking, thus boosting employee and business productivity. Policymakers have left the issue to the free market, which is only partially encumbered by unions.

National Productivity Review, pp. A related problem is that of the autonomy of the individual. According to the guide, video and photo cameras should be used supplementally The Joongang-ilbo, October 11, The Washington Post, August 30, The protection of privacy from another person or business is not yet legislated.


The final type of employee monitoring we will present, and the most controversial, is the active badge. The knowledge of being monitored can cause workers to increase their productivity.

In some countries, the employer must pay for the employee whilst dismissed for a period not exceeding 20 weeks.

Implementing an internet usage policy

For example, a CEO of a major corporation may desire only general guidelines from the board of directors, while a line worker may desire step by step instructions on how to complete every task. The union members decided to go on an unlimited sit-in strike in the building of the Grand National Party in Seoul to make their case public in January, However, to ensure perceptions of justice, organizations must also provide employees with opportunities to challenge the evaluations derived from electronic performance monitoring.

The preceding discussion should not lead one to conclude that concertive control and organizational fairness can be unequivocally equated. So, we have another reason to think that workers should not be subjected to new forms of electronic monitoring in the workplace without their consent.The consent-based argument developed is compared with arguments aimed at restricting the use of electronic monitoring in the workplace that are grounded in the values of privacy and autonomy.

Generally, a state is immune from suit by an individual. However, a state can consent to be sued, or Congress can abrogate a state's immunity, as long as it is within Congress' authority to do so (i.e.

constitutional authority). Property protection is the main reason for the workplaces engaging electronic surveillance, with the main intention being monitoring of the shoppers and the employees. Surveys have indicated that employees and shoppers in the workplaces are afraid of committing crimes, since the electronic surveillance instills fear, anxiety, and doubt (Stanton.

Moreover, the more times we experience that our resistance against monitoring is less than successful, the more we tend to exercise self-control, as a result of our ìidentification with the aggressorî.

Nov 26,  · Workplace Violence statics across the United States of America have been on a steady rise each year since the early ’s. Reports have consistently shown in recent years that than an average of homicides and million assaults occur each year in America, in the workplace.

Employers use monitoring to protect proprietary information and to guard against theft, to protect their investment in equipment and bandwidth, and to protect against legal liability.

With regard to drug or other substance testing, the employer has a strong argument in favor of testing based on the law.

An argument against the implementation of computer monitoring in workplaces
Rated 4/5 based on 56 review