Ethics, Privacy in the Workplace Essay

IntroductionThe aim of this essay is to put up a substantiating argument for the notion that an individual(a)s silence is more crucial than any other considerations in the meshplace. clipplace scenarios will be step uplined including furrow applications, storage of in-person information, Internet and e-mail, information technology do on covert, study policies and procedures and medical examination privacy. Differing honorable theories will be utilise to both sides of the argument.The Individuals Privacy in the workplace suck upting the mull.The story is often heard in Australia how easy it was for people to piss employment in the economically booming 1960s and early 1970s of how people would walk into a workplace in the morning and get a job straight international or within a couple of days jobseeking. Resumes, application letters and application forms were unheard of unless you were applying for a professional level position. As competition for jobs increased in the mid(prenominal) 1970s and early 1980s more and more selection tools were call for when hiring new cater. Resumes detailing training, past employment and referees aided in the selection or rejection of new staff. Appli rotterts are not take to list information in their Resume such as matrimonial status, gender, political leanings, religion, date of birth and number of children as part of tolerable employment opportunity legislation. In government based agencies in particular, chastity based recruitment is stressed.Whilst in small privately owned rail linees, employers n one and only(a)ffervescent prefer to recruit new staff who are known to them or who are recommended friends of existing staff members. With current federal legislative requirements regarding partial dismissal rules, employers must use care when employing new staff. A job searcher beetle expects their private information to be handled with trust and discretion. The employer expects information to be r ele wagon traint so they can make an accurate assessment of the job seeker. When it comes to ethics, both parties are acting in their own best interests. The seeker wants a job which is rewarding and lucrative in return for their effort.The employer wants the around skilled person for the least financial outlay feasible so that business goals and healthy profits can be achieved. By applying the ethical consequential theory of self-conceit regarding privacy, both parties are acting out of self-interest which best serves their own desire term goals. According to mental egoism, humans are by nature selfish. The jobseeker will divulge scarcely enough own(prenominal)ised information which will enable them to get and reenforcement the job. The employer seeks to find out as much information as possible about the jobseeker so that their business is not damaged in the long run by selecting an inappropriate candidate. Shaw (2009) Page 59Stored Informationtraditionally an employees basic face-to-face information such as their resume, emergency brake contact details, and bank details would usually be kept on hard file in a locked personnel filing cabinet. individualised information shared amongst work colleagues was up to the discretion of the employee and staff encourage to leave personal problems or beliefs at home. With the advent of information technology systems becoming more commonplace, communications though shared databases, email, intranet, internet and in time loving media shed by and large replaced paper files in storing beau monde and personal information. Besides conducting simple one to one personal communication in the workplace, our personal and private information is shared in cyberspace with and without our pull up permission and may be accessed off site by informal staff or external IT support contractors with administrative access. Websites visited and programs/files accessed on work computers in work time can be logged and monitor ed.This database of information needfully to be protected from improper use and access by wildcat people. The employee expects that the privacy of their information is protected. Monitoring IT usage at work by the employer may be seen as an action in the interests of the business only it can also be seen as an erosion of trust in the employer/worker contract dealingship. The Fair arrive at Australia Ombudsman recommends that employers implement best perform when maintaining privacy in the workplace. Employers, employees and their representatives need to know what information may be collected and retained and if it can be passed on to others.This best institutionalize creates certainty and security for both employers and employees. Fair excogitate Australia(2010) Page 1 If the non-consequentialist ethical theory of Kantism is applied to this scenario, employers are expected to do the amend liaison as an act out of duty and by these object lesson principles the employee inf ormation is protected. Under Kantism if an employer was to mishandle this private information by for voice selling it to third parties, this action would be morally wrong. Employers may guarantee their actions in enter internet and computer activity as a means to reduce goldbricking or cyber-slacking which is defined as employees development company internet accounts for personal / inappropriate use whilst freehand the outward appearance of world busy with their work. Employees may see this as an invasion of privacy if they begin not been informed or consented in their employment contract of this monitoring occurring.With Kants theory an employees actions of cyber-slacking would be considered morally wrong as they are not doing the right thing by their employer. By the same token the action of monitoring a workers use of the internet or email without their consent would also be considered immoral under Kants theory of ethics. Shaw (2009) Page 452 Fair Work Australia also says that Password and login codes may give employees the impression that their email and clear browsing activities during work hours are private and not aware that their activities can be scrutinised by their employer. Fair Work Australia (2010) Page 3 Employers should provide clear workplace policies and procedures to master all parties understand the rights and responsibilities that apply to email and internet usage.Prescriptive guidance would detail the amount of appropriate personal email and internet usage within and outside the workplace that is permissible prohibited activities and repercussions legislation how usage is logged and audited and who has access to this information. Similar rules would apply to workplace landline and mobile phone usage. Fair Work Australia (2010) Page 4-5 By applying the consequentialist ethical theory of Utilitarianism to IT usage monitoring, the morally right action provides for the greatest happiness for all those affected, e.g., workload is sha red evenly amongst staff secret, discordant conversations are less likely to occur online and it is also a say-so way to avoid capableness conflicts in the workplace. Employers would use Utilitarianism to justify their actions in monitoring staff IT practices. An employee applying Egoism in this instance could argue that logging staffs IT usage is an invasion of privacy and not in their interest, therefore morally wrong. Shaw (2009) Page 92Privacy beyond the workplaceMost people believe that what they do and the opinions they have in the privacy of their own home is private, however fond media sites such as Facebook and chitter can sometimes be viewed by third parties depending on privacy settings. It is believed that employers have viewed the favorable media sites of potential new workers to assess their suitability to the job. In an article in the Daily Mail intelligence activitypaper (UK) the story claims that one in five bosses have rejected job applicants after exhibit t heir social media sites.According to a survey by public relations company Eurocom Worldwide, The 21st-century human is learning that every action leaves an indelible digital trail, said Mads Christensen, Network Director at Eurocom Reynolds (2012) In Australia, Telstra conducted a business survey which resulted in similar figures of more than 12.5% of bosses checking job applicants Facebook pages and turning away potential employees based on things they have seen on Facebook. Top social media behaviours cited by bosses as leading to a candidate being command out are greenback negative comments about their workplace with 44% saying this could rule out an applicant Posts/comments which are discriminatory (37%) contrasted pictures posted on their profile (32%) Posts/comments which contain confidential information (32%) and 10% of employers use Facebook and other social networking sites to keep an eye on employees productivity. Symons (2011) Page 1 Employers say the biggest mistakes their current employees make on social networking sites are 1. Posting negative comments about their workplace, with 26% saying this is the biggest mistake. 2. Posting confidential information (16%)3. They post or are tagged in inappropriate pictures on their profile (14%) 4. Posting discriminatory comments (11%)5. Posting comments/photos/ connect during work hours (10%) Symons (2011) Page 2Part of the key argument regarding personal privacy isDo employers have the right to make judgements about potential or current employees based on information in social media sites? Surely this is not an accurate indication of their work skills and loyalty to a business as these social media sites are (usually) created when staff are not at work. It is tantamount to spying on a person in their private hours where their opinions are not necessarily those of their employer. The bosses may also have dubious moral and ethical behaviours outside of work hours, however the employers position of author ity and power gives an unfair advantage over the worker. David W. Ewing devised an employees invoice of rights where No employee shall be penalized for engaging in outside activities of his or her prime(a) after working hoursnor for swaying views contrary to top management.Shaw (2009) Page 488 The employer would argue that regard the content on an employees social media site is indicative of that individuals moral standards which may in turn be noxious to the companys temper, e.g. a primary school teacher with sexually provocative images of themselves may be deemed inappropriate behaviour and unhealthful to the reputation and public perception of the school. Employers could justify their actions of looking into the private full of lifes of their employees with Egoism and Kantism. It is in the employers interest to monitor the integrity of their staff on and off the job. And inappropriate behaviour even if it is outside the workplace is detrimental to the reputation of the o rganisation they work for. The employee could take the moral stance using Virtue Ethics of which they consider themselves to be a moral and perfect(a) person by their routine behaviour whilst working and that they shouldnt be judge by the actions they take outside of work. Shaw (2009) Page 88Employee medical exam PrivacyMost recently there has been a report that Employers have been going along with employees to medical appointments and in some cases a genuflectg for medical certificates to be altered so that their employees can return to work earlier. The ACTU (Australian Council of shift Unions) assistant secretary Michael Borowick has revealed that the privacy of ill workers has been eroded, Employers, insurers and employer representatives are increasingly attendance actual medical appointments with injured workers and, in some cases, forcing workers to attend company doctors. Weve also had reports of doctors being pressured to change medical certificates and return-to-work pl ans.In May 2012, social structure materials supplier Boral was warned by Fair Work Australia against allowing supervisors to accompany injured staff into doctors consulting rooms, with the workplace umpire saying it had the potential to operate unfairly. The Fair Work Ombudsman said that the Fair Work Act does not contain express provisions regarding whether an employer can accompany an employee to a medical appointment or have a private conversation with a doctor regarding the employees medical condition. Wilkins (2012) It is incredible to imagine that such an intrusion of intimate personal privacy is occurring in the workplace let alone that there is skimp legislation to prevent it.An employer could argue that it is in the interest of the company to ensure that employees are acting honestly in relation to the true nature of their illness as sick days cost the company property in delays and decreased productivity. Marketplace competitiveness is affected and workers compensation be may also increase. By applying Utilitarianism theory, an employer may justify this action as it promotes the general welfare of the company and is result orientated.Whereas the employee may argue that utilitarianism is think on the results of the action not whether the action is morally right or wrong for the privacy of the individual worker. In conclusion on poise the argument of the notion that an individuals privacy is more grievous than any other consideration in the workplace is affirmed. We now live in a society where we think we are in tame of our personal and private details when in reality our opinions, movements, interests and affiliations are being monitored constantly without our knowledge. An individuals right to privacy is dependent largely on the amount of information they share face to face, in typography or on the internet. It seems unfair that personal privacy should be sacrificed for embodied gain.BibliographyBooksShaw, W., Barry, V., & Sansbury, G. (200 9) Moral Issues in Business (1st Asia-Pacific ed.), Cengage Learning. Melbourne, AustraliaJournalsAndrejevic, M. Commercial surveillance in the digital era, Living Ethics issue 87 (autumn 2012) Heersmink, R., van den Hoven, J., Jan van Eck, N.,van den Berg, J. Bibliometric mapping of computer and information ethics (2011) Springerlink.com economyPrivacy Act (1988) Commonwealth of AustraliaPrivacy and Personal Information shelter Act (1998) NSWWeb ArticlesA quarter of bosses head to Facebook to vet CVs http//www.news.com.au/technology/a-quarter-of-bosses-head-to-facebook-to-vet-cvs/story-e6frfro0-1226208260693 THE VECCI BLOG, Bosses heading online to screen job candidates, The Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) 2011 http//blog.vecci.org.au/2011/11/30/bosses-heading-online-to-screen-job-candidates/Fair Work Australia, 2010 www.fairwork.gov.au/BestPracticeGuides/08-Workplace-privacy.doc Symons, P., Telstra Corporation Australia 2011 http//www.telstra.com.au/ abouttelstra/download/document/telstra-cyber-cv-fact-sheet.pdf Newspaper ArticlesReynolds, E., The Daily Mirror (UK) 2012 http//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2115927/How-Facebook-cost-job-One-applicants-rejected-bosses-check-profiles-social-media-sites.html Wilkins, G., Bosses intruding on workers doctor visits Sydney Morning Herald, September 26, 2012 http//www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/bosses-intruding-on-workers-doctor-visits-20120925-26jh6.html?skin=text-only