Sunday, November 9, 2008

Computer Monitoring in Business

My brother works for as a financial advisor for the company “Edward Jones.”  As tools for the job position, because he is currently working out of our home, the company sent him a LaserJet printer and a tablet PC.  He asked if he could use my computer to look up something on the Internet and I told him to use his own.  He said that “he couldn’t use the Internet to go on ESPN, they monitor that kind of stuff.”  This is an example of how technology has enabled monitoring of work.  It is a somewhat legitimate use of monitoring, but I believe this is a harm to our privacy. 

Even though my brother is not on his time card to work, which should allow him the freedom to surf the Internet as he pleases, he is still unable to do things like check his email or look up the scores of football games in fear that he will be caught and suffer the unknown consequences.  The computer is property of Edward Jones therefore they have the right to enforce the way in which the computer is used.  However, the harm is embedded in the fact that he is forced to work under this condition because the company has threatened his job with the idea of invading his privacy.

Computer monitoring like this case is used by companies everywhere.  It is a rule that is difficult to challenge because doing so brings the possibility of jeopardizing the individual’s career.  Although it is fact that computer monitoring is invasion of privacy, when is it justified?  I believe it is justified only in cases that show evidence of harming our security.  But privacy is a complicated issue that has many stances

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The restrictions put on the author’s brother by Edward Jones remind me of the restrictions put on my own internet surfing by T-Mobile while working in Starbucks. And directly mimic the constraints put on my company-provided desktop computer at work this past summer (which made logical sense, as I was working on an hourly rate).
But something interesting to note is the use of proxy, third-party websites that enable company employees and school students to bypass security settings and freely surf the internet. Should these sites be removed from the web? Technically, these third-party sites are “against the rules”, allowing individuals to search sites that the administrator aimed to ban. Furthermore, these sites allow added privacy to web surfing, eliminating the ability to track the history of websites visited and files downloaded.
I have extremely mixed opinions as to what is “right” in this situation. In fact, I think my ethical and political views are in direction conflict. Ethically, I believe that sometimes people stray from the goal at hand, and a simple helping hand, such as a monitoring or website blocking device results in a win-win situation for both the company and the employee. But politically, is this a violation of freedom? [203 words]