| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "EMPLOYEE PRIVACY RIGHTS": |
|
|
ABC Widget Company: Employee Handbook Privacy Section, 2005.
A look at how the ABC Widget Company has addressed the issue of employee privacy rights in the work place.
1,005 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents the ABC Widget Company's handbook on employee privacy rights. The privacy rights issues addressed in the handbook include the following: The rights of workers to personal privacy in the workplace, information technology and email privacy, and expectations and requirements of ABC for its employees in the exercise of their duties and responsibilities in the workplace.
From the Paper
"In the Age of Information, there are increasing concerns being voiced about what can legitimately be expected to be kept private, and how these issues affect employees' rights in the workplace. According to Hayden, Hendricks and Novak (1990, most adults spend approximately one-half of their waking hours in the workplace today, and it is therefore not surprising that employment practices affect a broad range of privacy rights. With the sole exception of polygraph ("lie-detector") testing, there are not many areas of workplace activities that are addressed by the U.S. Constitution or national privacy laws. As a result, employers in the United States have a great deal of flexibility in collecting data on their employees, regulating their access to personnel files, and disclosing the contents of employee files to those outside the organization. Besides the issue of personnel files, workplace privacy involves such practices as polygraph testing, drug testing, computer and telephone monitoring, and interference with personal lifestyle (Hayden et al., 1990)."
| |
|
Email Privacy Rights, 2005.
An examination of email privacy rights as they relate to employees, employers, and the workplace.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explores email privacy rights concerning employees, employers, and the workplace. The paper explains employer vs employee rights. The paper also includes the invasion of privacy lawsuits.
From the Paper
"The growing number of employees with desktop computers and work-provided laptop computers has increased management concerns for balancing potential liability and loss of productivity issues against the employees' rights to privacy."
| |
|
Drug Testing and Employee Privacy, 2006.
An essay weighing the employee's right to privacy against the right of the employer to ask have employees submit to drug testing.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 1 source, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The question of the ethical issues involved in employer's applying drug testing in the workplace is complicated by the employee's right to privacy. This essay argues that the employee right to privacy radically limits the range of employer options in regard to drug testing quite apart from other considerations such as effectiveness and legality. However, in sensitive jobs where potential harm to others is an issue, the moral right to privacy of an employee may itself be limited.
| |
|
Employee Privacy, 2005.
This paper addresses the issue of privacy for employees.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the four legal sources of privacy rights, which an employee has in the workplace. The author points out the way competition between the employee and employer impact the issue of privacy rights. The paper discusses the inclusion of privacy rights in employee handbooks.
From the Paper
"Employers are increasingly concerned with issues related to employee privacy. Mark Lies noted that an employee generally has four sources of privacy rights within the workplace: Constitutional statutes, state, common law and contract. Within every workplace, there is a constant competition between the interests of the employer and the employee, which directly impacts these privacy rights. Lies notes that conflict between employers and employees over issues related to privacy often focus on the use of personal information regarding the employee observation and regulation of employee conduct."
| |
|
The Privacy Rights of Individuals, 2005.
This paper discusses court cases, which deal with the privacy rights of individuals in the areas of homosexuality, drug testing, birth control and the right to die.
1,270 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 13 sources, APA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although everyone agrees that privacy rights of individuals should be protected by governmental laws, the extent of one's right to privacy has often been a matter of vast disagreement in the court system of the United States. The author points out that an individual's right to sexual privacy, including homosexuality, is an issue that has been brought before the courts repeatedly; "Bowers v. Hardwick" is a landmark case fought in 1986, which tested these boundaries. The paper relates that the United States Supreme Court has established that, to some extent, an individual does have a limited right to die: by citing "Griswold v. Connecticut" and even "Roe v. Wade", the court stated that, if the right to privacy is broad enough to include a woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy, it also provides a basis for the right to die.
From the Paper
"Drug testing is another issue that has been fiercely debated in the courts. With the increase of illegal drug use across the United States, many institutions have tried to institute a policy of random testing in order to combat the problem. Opponents of this policy claim that these random drug tests are an invasion of privacy rights and violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches. A group of parents challenged the Oklahoma school district's policy of random drug testing in front of the Supreme Court. The school district established a policy of random urine tests for students who want to join the marching band, academic team or any competitive extracurricular activity. In previous cases, the court had ruled that general urine testing required a warrant or some evidence of drug use. However, in a school setting, there is a lower expectation to privacy and in Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton in 1995, the Supreme Court ruled that drug testing for student athletes did not violate their privacy rights, since these students were the most at risk and could choose whether or not to participate in sporting activities."
| |
|
Privacy Rights, 2005.
A research paper on different aspects of current privacy rights and the acceptance of their violation by the U.S. government, such as the Patriot Act and surveillance issues.
824 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains privacy rights as they relate to anti-utopian literature, such as "Brave New World" or "1984". It also describes current violations of these rights as they relate to technological advances and military operations.
From the Paper
"Privacy can be considered one of the most valued rights of a civilized society. The framers of the constitution had this in mind when they developed search and seizure laws to protect the citizens' privacy from British soldiers. The American Civil Liberties Union predicts, "The United States is at risk of turning into a full-fledged surveillance society" (ACLU). The invasion of privacy has long been evident in anti-utopian literature, and now it is becoming more common, openly available, and more accepted by our government."
| |
|
Employee Privacy, 2004.
This paper addresses the legal and ethical considerations associated with employee privacy.
1,356 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper states that employees have no rights to privacy regarding their use of the internet and the telephone while at the work place. The author points out that employers have the right to monitor these activities. The paper relates that the employer has the right to monitor the employee's work by use of software that counts keystrokes.
From the Paper
"According to Joanne Freeman in "O.C. Metro", irrespective of what rights America's employees may believe they have in the workplace, they have little or no right to privacy. Generally speaking employers can monitor incoming as well as outgoing emails, telephone calls, Internet use and the data stored on workstation hard drives. In addition, employers can use computer software to monitor the amount of work performed by workers including counting the number of keystrokes performed per hour and the number of calls placed or answered."
| |
|
Censorship and Privacy Rights, 2003.
A persuasive essay that analyzes the social problems of censorship and violations of privacy rights and persuades American citizens to take a stance against government manipulation.
2,126 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper carefully describes the sociopolitical problems of censorship and privacy rights and presents a proposal of possible solutions to these problems. It explores various modern government manipulations that have been increased since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 and includes an analysis of various new legislation such as the Patriot Act.
From the Paper
"Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every website you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend?all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as ?a virtual centralized grand database??. To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources, add every piece of information that [the] government has about you?passport application, driver?s license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce records, complaints from noisy neighbors to the FBI?your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance?and you have the supersnoop?s dream: a ?Total Information Awareness? about every US citizen? (Krigg 2) This serves as just one example of the many acts that were passed due to an increased desire for national security."
| |
|
Privacy Rights and the Internet, 2003.
This paper discusses the ease of obtaining personal information on the internet and the lack of privacy rights including for inmates.
995 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although a prisoner has limited rights, there are certain protections provided to prisoners under the law, which brings up questions in terms of the rights and protections offered prisoners with regards to their personal privacy and information, which can be easily found on the internet. The author points out that, at present, there are no laws regarding internet privacy and reviews the United States' long history of struggling with privacy issues using the cases "Roe V. Wade" (1977), "Olmstead vs. United States 277 U.S. 438" (1928) and "Katz vs. United States, 389 U.S. 347" (1967). The paper states that, because there currently are no laws concerning privacy on the internet, there should be no problem with using VeriSign as a company to introduce e-commerce to the inmates as this company's policy considers the protection of an individual's privacy of the utmost importance.
From the Paper
"There are also more complex searches that a person can perform on the internet. For a fee, several companies will offer a complete profile of a person. For example, a company called, US Search, will find anybody and offers services such as background checks, locators, criminal search, sex offender search, and department of corrections search. They also offer other information like marriage and divorce certificates. There are many of these sites. They work by compiling databases, similar to the ones that law enforcement uses to find people by social security number or license number. Another site compiles scientific data as well. Abika.com offers background searches, psychological profiles, DNA profiling, etc. In short, if it is part of the public record, it can be compiled in a database for businesses to sell."
| |
|
Employee Email Privacy, 2002.
An analysis of the issues relating to email privacy in the American workplace.
3,650 words (approx. 14.6 pages), 19 sources, $ 133.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper focuses on the issues concerning employee email privacy in the workplace in the USA. With the rapid intrusion of electronic communication in our lives, protecting our online privacy has become a major source of contention in the offices today. Employers often feel that they have a right to snoop, by checking all incoming and outgoing emails in order to make sure that no important data is being leaked out. But more often than not, this results in total violation of employee privacy rights.
| |
|
Employee Privacy, 2005.
A paper on how the lack of privacy in the workplace encourages contempt.
1,348 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins with a discussing and acknowledging some of the legitimate reasons that businesses have for monitoring the workplace and then takes a look at why too much monitoring, or monitoring in workplaces that have not traditionally been monitored, may have more deleterious effects instead of beneficial ones.
Thesis/Introduction: Lack of Privacy in the Workplace Encourages
Contempt.
Legitimate Limits
Economic Reasons for Supervision
Reasons of Inter-employee, and Employee-customer Safety
Reasons of Performance
Definition of Excessive Supervision/Invasion of Privacy.
Examples of Excessive Supervision/Invasions of Privacy.
Legal Consequences/Ramifications.
Effects of Legal yet Employee-Perceived Insufficient Privacy.
Effects on Performance
Effects on Morale
Possible Psychological/Health Effects
Ultimate Employee Contempt Results From:
Illegal/Unethical Supervision and Invasion of Privacy.
Legal yet Excessive Supervision/Surveillance or What Employees View
as Excessive Invasion of Privacy
Conclusion: Employees View Invasion of Privacy with Contempt that Transfers to Contempt for Employers and Supervisors
From the Paper
"In today?s modern age, employers across the board have begun to resort to increasingly invasive methods to monitor the performance and behavior of their employees. Previously a realm of banks and retail establishments, employee monitoring has become the norm in most large and many small businesses -- aimed at everything from promoting employee professionalism, preventing theft and asset loss, reducing legal liability, improving productivity and customer service. However, like many things, utilizing the various (and increasing) methods of employee surveillance can also have significant and damaging effects upon the morale, and even performance of employees. Even worse, allowing legitimate surveillance to lapse into unfounded infringement upon employee privacy, legal or not, can cause nothing short of contempt within the workforce."
| |
|
Employee Privacy and Video Surveillance, 2002.
Examining the moral and ethical question regarding the right of a company to institute video surveillance of its employees.
2,358 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 72.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Should an employer be allowed to conduct video surveillance of its employees in the workplace? This paper examines the view of employees who feel that such surveillance violates their right to privacy. It also looks at the argument presented by employers, who say that employees have no right to privacy in the employer?s workplace, and the employer?s need to prevent misconduct and maximize productivity outweigh the privacy interests of employees. This paper examines this question, focusing on the current state of the law (both federal and state) and the continuing political and moral debate among labor and business groups.
From the Paper
"Employers utilize video surveillance for a variety of reasons. Situations that require scrutiny include suspicion of drug use, conducting personal business on company time, revealing trade secrets, surfing the Internet, and harassment issues (sexual and otherwise). For example, an employer could institute surveillance to ensure against a ?hostile workplace,? one of the causes of action under a sexual harassment suit. Similarly, surveillance could be used to ferret out instances of racial discrimination committed by employees but actionable against the employer. Employers in heavily regulated industries, such as nuclear power plants, also utilize videotaping to demonstrate compliance to federal authorities (Hymowitz 1)."
| |
|
Employees' Right To Privacy, 2003.
A look at the sensitive issue of employees' right to privacy in the workplace and preserving a balance of trust by the employer.
2,219 words (approx. 8.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how three basic issues must be addressed when looking at the ethical background of employee privacy rights. First, one must look at the arguments regarding the employers right to know and to use that knowledge. Secondly, one must investigate the claims of an employee's right to remain private. Finally, one must determine whose ethical responsibility it is to see that each of these competing rights are preserved as much as possible.
From the Paper
"The question of an employee?s right to privacy poses a particularly difficult ethical dilemma. On the one hand, the employer has an ethical obligation to the worker, to honor their privacy and their general human dignity and rights. On the other hand, the employer has an ethical obligation to the rest of his employees, to his customers, and to his shareholders, and possibly even to society at large to maintain certain standards within the workplace. The employer may also have an ethical obligation to obey relevant state or federal laws. In many ways, these laws can be used as a measure of the accepted ethics of a given situation. However, there are likely many cases where they are insufficient. It is difficult for the law to predict every situation that will arise, particularly in such a personal area as a right to privacy. Additionally, it is possible that the laws themselves are not entirely ethical."
| |
|
Employee Privacy Rights, 2005.
This paper explains that, with the rise of technologies in the workplace, employers are continuously finding new ways to monitor their employees on the job.
1,495 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that, while employers certainly have the right to expect an honest day's work of their employees, employees should have the right to have a certain amount of privacy on the job; most Americans assume that they have a constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy: This is not the case. The author points out that, while monitoring phone calls may be one of the oldest ways in which employers infringe on workplace privacy, by far the most prolific is through the computer terminal even with software, which allows employers to monitor the keystrokes of their employees or the amount of time the computer terminal is idle. The paper stresses that most employees are unaware it is happening because of the clandestine way in which employers have imposed many of their monitoring techniques.
From the Paper
"It is also important for employees to keep in mind that their work-related e-mail is not private. As with the computer terminal itself, because the employer owns the e-mail system, they have every legal right to review the contents of all e-mails sent across it. This includes incoming and outgoing e-mail. Furthermore, this e-mail monitoring does not stop with work-based e-mail accounts. Employers may also have access to private web-based e-mail accounts and instant message communications used by the employee from the work terminal such as accounts through Yahoo and Hotmail. No employee should assume that simply because the account is not owned by the employer, that they do not have a legal right to pour over personal e-mails and instant messages. As deplorable as it is, several lawsuits regarding this very issue have been decided in the employer's favor, including cases against Nissan, Pillsbury, and Epson."
| |
|
Privacy Rights in the Workplace, 2006.
A look at the issues concerning ethics in the workplace.
996 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to introduce, discuss and analyze business ethics in the workplace. Specifically, it identifies a basic physical privacy right issue at Harrah's casino in Reno, Nevada. In July 2001, a Reno bartender filed suit against Harrah's, Inc., the worldwide casino gaming corporation, after she was fired from her bartending job. Darlene Jespersen had worked for Harrah's for twenty-one years as a bartender and in other areas of the casino for not complying to new dress rules. It discusses how the Jespersen case is a clear physical privacy rights issue and contends that individual should not give up the rights and ethics they believe in just so they can be employed.
From the Paper
"Jespersen's position is based on the deontological considerations that a business should take into consideration regarding employee rights. Morally, it is wrong to force an employee to do something they morally or ethically disagree with, especially after the company hired the employee. If a policy changes, there should be consideration for employees who have been employed for years and may not "fit" with the current policy. As Jespersen emotionally noted, the company could have grandfathered her non-adherence to the program before they took the step of firing her. That would have been the moral and ethical thing to do for a long-time employee. However, that was not an option, and it points to the rigidity of the corporation and its rules."
|
|
|
