Is Electronic Surveillance Acceptable Practice? For the last decade the issues of Electronic Surveillance (ES) and monitoring of employees at work became the focus of researches of management specialists. ES means using measures of electronic control over the work of employees, like video cameras, automatic devices monitoring telephone conversations or Internet usage, devices of automatic registration of entry and exit, electronic time control, etc. Many practical researchers speak for using ES and monitoring at work. They say it can be a very effective tool for controlling the employees, detecting their faults, idleness and frauds. “People won’t steal or slack off if they know they’re being watched. The average employee is productive 30 minutes out of an hour.
They spend the rest of the time chatting, making personal telephone calls, getting something to drink, or going to the restroom.” comments Maggie Morgan, a specialist of Sentry Surveillance in Kennesaw, Ga. (ES in the Workplace, Norwich Uni.) But, of course, specialists underline practical negativism and rejection of using daily electronic monitoring from the side of the employees. People like to be trusted and mostly pay back for this with good productivity and decent behavior at work. Many employees find measures of electronic control and surveillance to be the acts, which derogate from their human dignity and directly infringe the privacy rights of a person. Such opposition received immediate support by legislative regulations. In a number of European countries, like Austria, there are some restrictions for using measures of ES at work.
The Essay on History of Work Force Monitoring and Surveillance
The extent to which organizations monitor their employees reflects a lot about how the organization perceives its employees. Workforce surveillance entails email and internet monitoring, gathering of personal data, biometrics, local tracking as well as covert surveillance. Studies show that surveillance has been a part of organizational routine since time immemorial and that surveillance can take ...
In order to establish any form of electronic control of employees, business organizations need to receive a special permission from the works council. Similar laws, establishing privacy protection regulations, were attempted to be adapted in our country, in particular, in California, but they were vetoed by the Governor at the early stages. In any way, recently the demand and popularity of using different means of ES in the USA is firmly growing. As the survey of NBC Nightly News shows, about 40% of American small companies use video cameras to control the employees during their working hours, (ES at the Workplace, Norwich Uni.).
Now more than 80% of the companies control Internet usage of the employees. Also, more than 50% of the companies monitor telephone conversations of the personnel, when in 2001 this index was only 9% (2005 ES Survey).
Besides, the researches underline that recently the sensitivity of the employees to electronic control and monitoring is decreasing, and now the personnel becomes more and more tolerant to the measures of ES at work. Especially after the events of Sept.
11, people started finding ES and monitoring to be very efficient for preventing some dangerous criminal or immoral intentions of the employees. Now many employers practice notifying their employees about the periods of using ES and monitoring. Recently, the employers firmly extend usage of this type of control for keeping the threads of business in their hands. To help control the risk of litigation, security breaches and other electronic disasters, employers should take advantage of technology tools to battle people problemsincluding the accidental and intentional misuse of computer systems, telephones and other electronic resources, Nancy Flynn, director of a research project, commented (2005 ES Survey).
Of course, using the means of ES at workplace is acceptable practice. But my personal opinion is in favor of moderate usage of ES, especially in small business, where it is much easier to control everything personally.
The Term Paper on Health And Safety Restaurant Employees Workplace
Introduction According to Bohle and Quinlan (1999: xii), the cost of workplace injuries and disease is in excess of $20 billion dollars per year. Obviously, these figures are alarming and would suggest that OHS would be a top priority for management. However, a survey from Queensland manufacturer revealed that many companies had no written policy regarding occupational health and safety? and? 48 ...
Some control by ES can be reasonable at large developed enterprises or production plants, but it must be done carefully and periodically. I believe that in the offices or factories, where bosses demonstrate trust to their employees, the output and organizational climate are a lot better.
Bibliography:
“2005 Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance Survey.” American Management Association. 18 May, 2005. 14 Aug. 2005 . Bryant, Susan.
“Electronic Surveillance in the Workplace.” Canadia Journal of Communication. Volume 20. 20 Nov. 1995. 14 Aug. 2005 .
“Electronic Surveillance in the Workplace.” Norwich University. 14 Aug. 2005 . Sinrod, Eric J. “Electronic Surveillance in the Workplace Cyber Speak.18 Oct. 2001. 14 Aug. 2005 ..
