E-Monitoring in the Workplace: Privacy, legislation, and surveillance software

Communications of the ACM

Volumn 49, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 72-77

  Nord, G Daryl ^a   McCubbins, Tipton F ^a   Nord, Jeretta Horn ^a  

^a OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT (ECPA); SENSITIVE DATA; SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY;

COMPUTER VIRUSES; DATA PRIVACY; DATA REDUCTION; LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 33747189184     PISSN: 00010782     EISSN: 15577317     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1145287.1145290     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Workplace Rights on Electronic Monitoring, ACLU online archives; archive.aclu.org/issues/worker/legkit2.html.
2. American Management Association, AMA Research: Workplace Monitoring and Surveillance, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2005; www.amanet.org/research/archive_2001_1999.htm.
3. American Management Association, Survey on Workplace E-Mail Reveals Disasters in the Making, May 28, 2003; www.amanet.org/press/amanews/Email_Survey2003.htm.
4. Bloom, E., Schachter, M., and Steelman, E. Justice in a Changing World: Competing Interests in the Post 9–11 Workplace: The New Line Between Privacy and Safety. 29 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 897 (2003).
5. Crimmins, J. Even federal judges come under surveillance when online. Chicago Daily Law Bulletin 147, 159 (Aug. 14, 2001).
6. Deal v. Spears, 980 F.2d 1153, 1155–1157 (8th Cir. 1992).
7. DiLuzio, S. Workplace E-Mail: It's Not as Private as You Might Think. 25 Del. J. Corp. L. 741 (2000).
8. Kopp, K. Electronic Communications in the Workplace: E-Mail Monitoring and the Right of Privacy. 8 Seaton Hall Const. L. J. 861 (1998).
9. Neilson//NetRankings, U.S. Online Population Internet Use. (Dec. 18, 2002); www.nielsen-netratings.com/pr/pr_021218.pdf.
10. Pew Internet & American Life, Getting Serious Online: As Americans Gain Experience, They Use the Web More at Work, Write Emails with More Significant Content, Perform More Online Transactions, and Pursue More Serious Activities, (Mar. 3, 2002); www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=55.
11. TBG Insurance Services Corporation v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles Co.; Robert Zieminski, Real Party in Interest, 96 Cal. App. 4th 443; 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 155 (Cal. App. 2002).