{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

DSST Business Ethics Study Guide sm

Labor unions may negotiate limitations on video

Info iconThis preview shows page 28. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Labor unions may negotiate limitations on video recordings of unionized workers. In 1997, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that surveillance was subject to mandatory bargaining, meaning a union must agree to any monitoring of unionized workers. This includes the use of hidden cameras. Read the National Labor Relations Board Advice Memorandum on this case. Union members should speak with a union representative if they have concerns about workplace video monitoring. What about video cameras that include audio surveillance? Video cameras that also capture audio recordings may be subject to laws relating to audio recording, including wiretap and eavesdropping laws. Federal law does not prohibit audio recording of phone conversations as long as one party on the call consents to recording. Most states have extended this law to include recording in-person conversations. Twelve states have laws that require that all parties in a conversation consent to audio recording. For a state-specific guideline of laws regarding audio recording, visit Can We Tape? A Practical Guide to Taping Phone Calls and In-Person Conversation in the 50 States and D.C . (The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press). 6. Workplace Privacy Protections What about my employer's promises regarding e-mail and other workplace privacy issues. Are they legally binding? Not necessarily. Usually, when an employer states a policy regarding any issue in the workplace, including privacy issues, that policy is legally binding. Policies can be communicated in various ways: through employee handbooks, via memos, and in union contracts. For example, if an employer explicitly states that employees will be notified when telephone monitoring takes place, the employer generally must honor that policy. There are usually exceptions for investigations of wrong- doing. If you are not already aware of your employer's workplace privacy policies, it is a good idea to become informed. In Smyth v. Pillsbury, the employee's termination was upheld by the court, even though the company had a policy of allowing e-mail use for personal communications. In this case, the employee had sent messages to co-workers that were deemed highly inappropriate for workplace communications. (Smyth v. Pillsbury, C.A. NO. 95-5712, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Jan.18, 1996, Decided, Jan. 23, 1996, Filed. www.Loundy.com/CASES/Smyth_v_Pillsbury.html ) Are there any laws that deal with workplace privacy? Currently there are very few laws regulating employee monitoring. If you are concerned about this issue, contact your federal legislators, especially the members of the House and Senate Labor committees in Congress. (See PRC Fact Sheet 18 "Privacy in Cyberspace," www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs18-cyb.htm .)
Background image of page 28
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online