0

Report
on
Issues on Employee Monitoring

Submitted
REPORTto
Ms. C. Ramirez
Technical Writing ENGL3155-1
ON
University
of Belize

ISSUES IN EMPLOYEE MONITORING

by

by
H. Chiac (20131100280)
H. Chiac and D.and
Gentle
D. Gentle (2013110013)
Monday 14th of October 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract............................................................................................................1
Introduction......................................................................................................2
Background......................................................................................................3
Discussions and Findings.................................................................................4
Productivity Argument...............................................................................4
Security Argument......................................................................................6
Creativity Argument...................................................................................7
Conclusion........................................................................................................8
References........................................................................................................9

Abstract
Employee monitoring has raised concerns from all areas of society business
organizations, employee interest groups, privacy advocates, lawyers, professional
ethicists, and every combination possible. Each advocate has its own rationale for or
against employee monitoring whether it be economic, legal, or ethical. However, no
matter what the form of reasoning, there are some key arguments that emerge from the
pool of analysis. These arguments have been used equally from all sides of the debate.
The purpose of this paper is to examine three key arguments that have been made with
respect to employee monitoring. A survey was conducted to establish the views and the
opinions of employees on the topic.

Introduction
Over the past years there has been a dramatic change in the work field brought about by
the introduction of new technology. Today technology is one of the most important
aspects in humanity and although it may have a positive impact in our lives, it also gives
rise to difficulties. Some major concerns include the long-term impact it may have in the
society and the fact that technological revolutions are reshaping culture and human
nature. This leads to one of its challenges which is the assessment
of the ethical and policy issues associated with employees monitoring software. On one
hand, new technologies and internet provides an opportunity to improve productivity and
increase profitability, but on the other hand it also generates the question of ethics and
effectiveness. Employers want to be sure their employees are doing a good job and
ensure that they are following policies and procedures, however employees find it
uncomfortable that their every move whether it be a coffee break or trip to the water
cooler are being logged. This is the essential conflict of workplace monitoring.
New technologies make it possible for employers to monitor many aspects of their
employees' jobs, especially on telephones, computer terminals, through electronic and
voice mail, and when employees are using the Internet. Advance technologies also
include global positioning systems which enables organization to track an employees
every move. Using devices such as GPS sensors in company provided cell phones and
cars, infrared LED ID badges, and biometric touch-pads, employers can know whether
employee is making a detour from prescribed route, whether a worker is exceeding
his/her lunch break and whether a salesperson really is calling a customer. Dramatic
improvements in video and audio technologies allow organizations to conduct efficient
surveillance of their workers.

Background

In the computer systems field, there has been a great production of technologies to
monitor employees. The price of monitoring or surveillance software ranges from several
thousand dollars down to free. Electronic monitoring programs such as Investigator,
Black Orifice, Mail Marshall, Websense, Survey Suite, Spector and others allow
employers to keep track of the following:

Web Activity which gets detailed visibility into exactly what your employees are
doing on the internet.

Email Activity which allows one to captures and stores email from corporate
email platforms, such as Exchange and Lotus Notes, as well as webmail sources
like Gmail, Yahoo, and Hotmail, ensuring you see what information is coming in
and going out.

Keystroke Activity which records every last key and incorporates not only what
was typed but associates the keystrokes to the user, the application used, the title
of the window, the date and time the event occurred and more. This may also
capture passwords to applications.

Application Activity which allows an employer to know when theyre working

and what theyre working. The moment an application is launched, the monitoring
program begins to track the application name, launch time, the number of times
its been opened, window title and more.

Network Activity which looks at user activity from the networks perspective.

Document Tracking which keep tabs on where they come from and where they
go. Not knowing whats entering and leaving your companys network opens the
door for data leaving the organization and malware being introduced into it.

All these features and many more basically enable employers to track employee
keystrokes, comb through employee e-mails, review employees computer files, see what
websites employees have visited, determine how long an employee stays online, block
employees from forbidden websites. These monitoring are practically allowed. Therefore,

unless company policy specifically states otherwise, your employer may listen, watch and
read most of your workplace communications.
The Productivity Argument
One of the most common concerns in monitoring employees is if it leads to higher
productivity. The productivity argument answers the question, Does employee
monitoring lead to higher productivity? The reasoning begins by viewing monitoring
both as a productivity and cost containment tool. First, organizations would think of
monitoring as a productivity tool. Many organizations decide to monitor employees in an
attempt to keep the employees personal computer use to a minimum. Surfing the internet
and sending personal e-mails takes up time and reduces productivity. For example,
business e-mails can be concise, quickly composed, and instantly transmitted, thereby
improving organizational effectiveness when they replace bulky, time-consuming formal
memos and letters. Unfortunately, e-mail can also hamper organizational effectiveness
when employees waste hours e-mailing family and friends using their company e-mail
accounts. Every minute spent booking a flight or checking personal items is a minute not
spent increasing revenue. From the survey conducted some employees actually agree that
employers should include monitoring software since some employees might indulge in
non-productive activities.
However, some employees think the opposite argument. Surveillance can have a negative
impact on productivity. Monitoring employees can have a negative impact on employees
since it can cause psychological and physical health problems, increased boredom, high
tension, extreme anxiety, depression, anger, and sever fatigue. Invasive surveillance and
monitoring can also lead to higher levels of stress. Further, people under stress are sick
more often and heal more slowly, which leads to an increase in sick leave and a decrease
in productivity while at work. Employees say that invasion of privacy can literally make
them sick and may have a counter effect on the productivity that organizations seek.
Others also believe that it will not affect their productivity in a negative manner because
they are to solely do their job.

Moreover, some view monitoring as a cost containment tool. The cost of

telecommunications is forcing employers to re-examine their Internet use. With personal
web surfing and large e-mails taking up precious bandwidth, many employers are using
monitoring as a cost containment tool. The fewer employees downloading large files and
surfing heavy bandwidth sites, the smaller the fiber optic needed to handle the traffic and
therefore the lower the telecommunication expense. Certain software products are
designed for this purpose. For example, SmartFilter from Secure Computing disrupts the
actions of the user by slowing the download of large MP3 files. The goal of the program
is to frustrate the user thereby making such downloads less likely in the future.

The Security Argument

The security argument answers the question, Does employee monitoring lead to greater
organizational security? With a greater reliance on computer systems, information assets
are seen as a vulnerable point of attack. Corporations that do not adequately secure their
systems risk unwanted distribution, retrieval, or modification of private corporate
information. One hacker or virus can bring operations to a halt. In such a scenario,
monitoring employees protects the safety and security of the organization.
Almost half of the companies use video monitoring to counter theft, violence and
sabotage. Of those, only 7% state they use video surveillance to track employees on-thejob performance. Most employers notify employees of anti-theft video surveillance
(78%) and performance-related video monitoring (89%). (David R. Lease, PhD, Capella
University).
Employers feel prone to security concerns. Disloyal employees are able to e-mail trade
secrets and confidential documents quickly and easily to a large audience. In most cases
security breaches come from knowledgeable insiders and not from random hackers from
the outside. By monitoring Internet usage and content, corporations might be able to
detect and halt security breaches. Plus, the mere knowledge of increased surveillance may
deter potential employee theft.
On the other hand, some of employee perceptions of electronic monitoring focus on
employees privacy concerns. Employees feel like electronic monitoring can be an
invasion of privacy. Most employees do believe that they have a right to privacy in
their workplaces. Employees do not believe that employers have a free right to intrude
upon their privacy. Basically some employees believe that it is illegal and unethicalfor
employers to intrude into employees area of privacy. This does not imply, however, that
employees do not think that employers have some right of their own to monitor
employees activities in the workplace. From the survey it suggest that some employees

do not think it invades privacy since work time is for not personal time and the privacy
issue depends upon on factors including what is being monitored.

The Creativity Argument

The creativity argument seeks to answer the question Does employee monitoring lead to
greater creativity? It is hard to imagine living in a world in which your every word is
recorded for analysis. To spend eight or ten hours a day knowing that your keystrokes can
be monitored for productivity and your documents analyzed seems overwhelming. In
such an environment, employers would severely hold back creative thinking, as
employees would begin to act and then think in response to the unseen observer. New,
essential, alternative ideas may be filtered out of communications if the employee is
constantly worried what the observer may think. But corporations rely upon creative, new
thinking in order to constantly move forward and improve. Most companies work hard to
form innovative and open teams to foster creative employees and improved products and
services. Innovation comes only from creativity and is in jeopardy when that creativity is
stifled with even the threat of monitoring.
However, most employees did not think it affected their innovation or creativity. If they
are to become successful at what they do, they disregard the fact that they are being
monitored. They feel like creativity comes from skills or talent and if its a natural talent
then having your employers observing you should not affect your work.

Conclusion
Maintaining a safe and efficient workplace requires organizations to keep a watchful eye
on employee activities, which could pose harm to others or create liability for the
company. One way for a company to maintain efficiency and lower liability is for the
employer to monitor its employees. Monitoring, however, is only the first step.
Employees must be educated about monitoring so that they can understand the lack of
privacy that currently exists at work. Employees need to be educated to understand how
technology works, to understand capabilities and limitations. Employers who monitor
must be responsible and reasonable. Employers must explain to workers what they
monitor. If a business must monitor the activities of their employees to create a safe work
environment, then so be it. Although some people and organizations believe that
employee monitoring is wrong or unethical, there is a clear need for such practice.

10

References
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse(April 2011). Workplace Privacy and Employee
Monitoring. Revised August 2013: https://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs7-work.htm

Dr David R. Lease. Balancing Productivity and Privacy Electronic Monitoring of

Employees. Retrieved from Capella University, NOVA Southeastern
University:http://www.spectorcne.com/features#activity

Jonathan Yerby(date). Legal and ethical issues of employee monitoring. Journal of

Applied Knowledge Management. Retrieved() from Middle Georgia State College:
http://www.staffmonitoring.com/P32/thelaw.htm