As in this case, substantial evidence does not exist, as it is uncertain what the injured party was wearing at the time of the accident, thus the court should set aside the first decision.
Question
Such a measure clearly goes against the National Labor Relations Act which "extends rights to most private sector employees and their employers, stating that employees have the right to form, join, support or assist unions, also known as labor organizations, who may bargain collectively with the employer on the employees' behalf seeking to modify wages or working conditions" ("What are my rights as an...employee,...employer,...union?" 2007, NLRB). Employers are not permitted to harass or discourage employees from joining unions. Threatening employees publicly regarding union membership is clearly threatening behavior in this instance.
Question
This case centers on what constitutes a reasonable expectation of privacy. Murray was working in a public location, at his place of employment, not his home, thus his contention that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy and should not be monitored falls flat. "Except in instances of wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping, there are no specific laws prohibiting many forms of surveillance, such as cameras. The only real concern is with common-law privacy rights...a key issue will be he individual's expectation of privacy. For example, a hidden camera in a restaurant reception area is OK -- there is no expectation of privacy in such a public setting. However, as surveillance moves into more private areas, where an individual may have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the issue becomes more problematic. Where surveillance is not secretive, but rather is out in the open, the basis of any claimed expectation of privacy quickly evaporates" (Fitting, 1995:1).
In this instance, as the employee was working out 'on the floor' and not, for example, in a restroom or a concealed area, his expectations of privacy are not reasonable, thus his employers were within their rights to monitor him. Murray is no different than an individual being monitored...
Conclusion The main ethical principle here should not be a deontological argument, but rather should be utilitarianism. The greatest number of people will actually be helped by ensuring that discrimination of any type (including the issue of reverse discrimination) does not continue in the United States. It is therefore very important to use the arguments that one can make to show why reverse discrimination will harm a large number of people,
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now