Topic Exploration Group #5: The Phenomena Of “Online Exhibitionism” And How It Relates To The Employer-Employee Relationship.

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/labor_law/meetings/2010/2010_tech_herbert.authcheckdam.pdf

      In the previous two blog posts I have used to talk about the subject of employee surveillance, privacy rights, and productivity, I have been highly critical of the actions taken by corporations to observe and monitor employees. This is mostly because I enjoy my privacy and am a big advocate for the rights of the employees over the rights of the employers. I feel that employees and employers need to both have an equal amount of power in order for the corporate systems to work. That doesn’t mean I can’t see the reasons for why employers would want to use these systems, however.  I can see how an employer would want to use CCTV cameras to stop theft from the workplace, and I can see how an employer would want to use other observation techniques to observe how employees act and move in a work environment, in order to better design the workplace and increase productivity. There are a number of other situations I failed to consider, however, which includes the effects of social media sites on the workplace.

      The paper linked to above goes into some of the reasons employers might use to monitor employee communications. It details what it calls the social phenomena of “online exhibitionism”, which it describes as the phenomena of people sharing incredibly personal information and private thoughts in a public setting online, in a manner they wouldn’t normally in real life. This can be anything from simply showing a picture of one’s lunch, to publicly decrying and attacking ones boss. It can also lead to the release of business information to those who should not have it. And, if people are “friended” to others online, this can lead to serious workplace conflicts and legal issues. As such, employers want to monitor employee communications because they want to stop potential leaks, legal troubles, workplace conflicts, or discriminations suits in the bud, before they are allowed to occur.

      So, what are my thoughts on such matters? I think the article makes a good point, and makes me understand more why employers would want to implement such systems of surveillance. I can see why employers would want to stop leaks and lawsuits before they even start, and I can see how the extremely frank and open way people communicate online could be extremely damaging to the workplace. I am not sure I agree that they should implement such systems, however. Leaks can be patched with NDAs, while discriminations suits and workplace hostility can be helped by sensitivity training. I still remain unconvinced that such extensive systems are needed.

So, what do others think about this matter? Would employer monitoring of employee communication stop potentially damaging actions in the bud? Is it worth the costs to privacy? Are there other methods that might be more effective?

-Noel Hansen.