Persuasive Essay On Surveillance Of Employees

Today, Canadian’s lives today are as translucent as ever. Most organizations especially the government constantly watches each and every one of our moves. By definition, surveillance is any systematic focus on any information in order to influence, manage, entitle, or control those whose information is collected. (Bennet et Al, 6). From driving to the shopping mall to withdrawing money from the ATM machine, Canadians are being watched constantly. With Canada’s commitment to advance technology and infrastructure in the 1960s, government surveillance is much easier and much more prevalent than it was hundreds of years ago. Even as early as 1940s, the Dominion Bureau of Statistics used punch cards and machines to determine who is available

Did you know that 58% of employers have fired workers for Internet and email misuse? And 48% justify employee video monitoring as an effort to “counter theft and violence?” According to the “2007 Electronic Monitoring & Surveillance Survey” of which 304 U.S. companies participated in, computer-monitoring results have led to the highest cause of employee termination. These companies used several tactics to eavesdrop on employees while claiming to be managing productivity or for security purposes. Some argue that surveillance is absolutely necessary to help protect and grow a business; others argue that employee and customer rights come first. However, companies that use such tactics often violate the privacy of individuals, exploit their private information and even punish those that do not conform to their standards.

Wiretapping is the act of acquiring information by the means of tapping into telephone calls. It has been debated that the head of executive branch should be able to wiretap, without warning the one being ‘tapped’, in order to protect national security. The President should not be able to wiretap without a warrant because it violates the Fourth Amendment and defeats the purpose of checks and balances.

Surveillance is not a new thing. In fact, espionage, tracking, and sleuthing were part of society ever since 5000 B.C. But in the rise of the modern era, the idea of surveillance in the public eye serves as a controversial topic of discussion. People everywhere complain about the existence of security cameras, government tracking, and the right to privacy. Such problems, however, are not due to the sudden discovery of surveillance, but the modern abuse of it. Seeing the disastrous effects of over surveillance from George Orwell’s 1984, the public rightfully fears societal deterioration through modern surveillance abuse portrayed in Matthew Hutson’s “Even Bugs Will Be Bugged” and the effects of such in Jennifer Golbeck’s “All Eyes On You”. The abuse of surveillance induces the fear of discovery through the invasion of privacy, and ensures the omnipresence of one’s past that haunt future endeavors, to ultimately obstruct human development and the progress of society overall.

As the late Frank Herbert once said, “Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.” Federal electronic wiretapping and supervision dates to the Wiretap Act of 1968, and has only increased in the following decades. Organizations such as the National Security Agency have been empowered by FISA (United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Courts) to bypass the authority of the Supreme Court in determining constitutional validity on searches. Government Surveillance is unjustified because it infringes upon personal freedoms, does not guarantee safety, and is not a vital necessity.

The issue of privacy is a big concern in the workplace. With the expanding of new technology, many employees are concern about his or, her privacy in the workplace. Employees have the right to go to work knowing that his or, her employer will not invade their privacy. The rights to privacy in the workplace only provide limited protection for workers against monitoring and breach of confidentiality. The National Work Rights Institute states, under the federal law, "the limited protection the Electronic Communication Privacy Act of 1986 provides to employees' has been reduced because the statue has been outdated."

I think that cops should have body camera because they need it just in care they be in the wrong or the victim be in the wrong.If they dont have them they could like be in something that there boss can say so what happen and they cant tell what happen really happen like they start to lie

In May of 2013 Edward Snowden leaked NSA documents revealing that the organization had been, warrantlessly spying on U.S. citizens, via the internet. (Britannica) The information leaked showed that the NSA had been tapping phones and monitoring citizen’s text messages, emails and social media. (NPR) Snowden has said that he brought these documents to light, not to discredit the government’s method, but to expose it’s methods. Snowden wanted to allow the people of the United States to decide for themselves. (Britannica)

Surveillance is, and has always been conducted by the government. The government gathers data through many apparatuses including, planes, GPS/satellites, video cameras, drones, microphones, police, the internet, and most importantly, through its surveillance programs. One big surveillance program the government runs is PRISM, “a system the NSA uses to gain access to the private communications of users of nine popular Internet services” (Lee). Surveillance programs can allow the government to abuse their powers or hide secret information, which is why these programs should be limited, as they pose a threat to one’s safety and privacy.

governments have always spied on their people, but after 9/11 (the terrorist attack that killed almost 3,000 people,) the United States took a new approach to conduct surveillance to insure public safety. Now the NSA can access a person's personal information like emails, calls, and messages without consent. This government action is a violation to people's privacy, it also is unconstitutional and contrivance the Fourth Amendment, plus the act of a person(s) spying on another is inhumane and can cause conflict between countries.

Although we may not realize it, so much of our lives are online. Whether it is for work or for media consumption, many of us rely on the internet to get through our daily lives. Therefore, one of the most crucial aspects of computer science as technology moves forward, is the overall security and safety of the software we use. This can range from programs on our computers or smartphones all the way to the social media websites we use. It seems like we are constantly learning about new data breaches that may have leaked our personal information and what is even more unfortunate is the fact that we are not informed of a majority of these data breaches until months or even years after the incident has occurred.

In the years of government surveillance has improved in many ways such as the technology and advancing the fundamental ideals of individuals rights, they use the technology to avoid many terrorist attack. The government preferably and advancing the fundamental ideals of individual rights, they use technology to avoid a numerous of restrictions on surveillance on common civilians. Between the citizens of this country, there is a rising concern for the issue of privacy due to such a powerful creation, in this case the Utah Date Center, as they feel that they are feeling a severe violation on the rights that they had previously considered impenetrable. In order to stop these concerns, Congress should consider endorsing a law that seeks to join the government’s use of technology to our Constitutional values.

The right to privacy was not established as a constitutional doctrine until after the result of the Supreme Court ruling in the 1965 case of Griswold vs. Connecticut. The court decision was based on the interpretation of several amendments within the Bill of Rights. Although the Bill of Rights does not explicitly state anything about the right to privacy, a combination of its sections was used as the framework for establishing the right (“Griswold v. Connecticut (1965),” 2007).

"Privacy. There seems to be no legal issue today that cuts so wide a swath through conflicts confronting American society: from AIDS tests to wiretaps, polygraph test to computerized data bases, the common denominator has been whether the right to privacy outweighs other concerns of society…" This quote from Robert Ellis Smith explains, in one sentence, the absolute need to ensure privacy in the workplace. One of the most interesting, yet controversial, areas concerning public personnel is employee privacy. What limits are there to employers’ intrusions into, and control over, employees’ behaviors and personal properties?

Today, individuals are sacrificing privacy in order to feel safe. These sacrifices have made a significant impact on the current meaning of privacy, but may have greater consequences in the future. According to Debbie Kasper in her journal, “The Evolution (Or Devolution) of Privacy,” privacy is a struggling dilemma in America. Kasper asks, “If it is gone, when did it disappear, and why?”(Kasper 69). Our past generation has experienced the baby boom, and the world today is witnessing a technological boom. Technology is growing at an exponential rate, thus making information easier to access and share than ever before. The rapid diminishing of privacy is leaving Americans desperate for change.