Asset Protection

Please answer original forum with a minimum of 500 words and respond to both students separately with a minimum of 250 words each 

Please follow directions or I will dispute 

page 1 Original Forum with References 
page 2 Stacy Response with References 
page 3 John Response with References 

Original Forum 

Should employers be allowed to monitor computer, Internet, email and telephone use by employees? Should employers utilize closed-circuit television (CCTV) and global positioning technologies to collect information on employees? Why? How can a security and loss prevention practitioner leverage the capabilities of social media to enhance job performance in protecting people and assets?

Stacy
Social media, CCTV, and global positioning devices are great tools when they are utilized in the proper manner but can be abused if not used within specific guidelines laid out by companies.
According to Jeske and Shultz, approximately 1.96 billion people worldwide are active on various social media platforms. (Jeske, 2016) I find that there is significant value in using social media to research applicants prior to calling or emailing them for a pre-screen. As a manager with three years of experience in interviewing and hiring, I always review applicants’ LinkedIn profiles for any information that wasn’t included on their application or resume. If the applicant didn’t have a LinkedIn profile or if it was private, I have used Facebook and Twitter to obtain additional information on how they present and conduct themselves. For example, a company I worked for had a zero-tolerance policy regarding visible tattoos, especially those that could not be covered using make-up or clothing within the dress code. While researching an applicant, I discovered that he had a tattoo that covered most of his neck. Regardless of whether or not it was offensive, it was not compliant with company standards, so I didn’t contact him for a phone screening or in-person interview in order to save us both time since ultimately, he wouldn’t be hired because of the location of his tattoo regardless of his education or experience. In contrast, I do not believe social media platforms should be used to ascertain an applicant’s marital status, religious beliefs, political affiliations, or sexual orientation so as to not make a biased decision based on their personal beliefs and preferences, especially when it would violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Some social media platforms, such as Facebook, allow users to restrict the information they share to the public and even people on their “friends” list. In doing so, this makes using social media as a tool for pre-screening ineffective. Similarly, it makes monitoring an employee’s social media usage nearly impossible once they are hired. However, if the applicant turned employee is allowed to access social media platforms, personal email, and websites not related to their job duties using company assets, their activity should be monitored and/or restricted. Additionally, the employee should be required to sign an acknowledgment of using company assets for personal use.
As for personal social media usage aside from using company assets, it’s good practice to create an open-door policy for employees to report issues they find on social media. For example, a terminated employee made indirect threats to the company I was working for, and one of his previous co-workers reported it to me for fear he may engage in an act of workplace violence. The co-worker was able to provide us with a screenshot of his Facebook post. After discussing with our Human Resources Manager, we decided to make his department as well as all members of leadership aware that he was not allowed on the property and if he was seen to contact Security immediately. He did not attempt to come on to property but by his co-worker reporting what she saw on social media, we were able to act in a proactive manner to protect people and assets. There’s also an added benefit to using social media to communicate with employees and the general public during severe weather events, traffic delays near your facility, or other security-related incidents.
CCTV should be used to monitor employee productivity, cash handling areas, and any other areas with high-value assets that employees have access to during and after normal business hours. However, I do not believe that CCTV should be the only resource used when disciplining an employee. For example, when I worked as a Loss Prevention Agent in retail, one of the department managers requested to review a video of an employee who was talking to her boyfriend for an extended period of time on the floor. I advised her against reprimanding her based on the video review because it would seem she was spying on the employee. I encouraged her to remind her of the policy and address it going forward in the moment versus relying on CCTV to monitor her employees. Additionally, CCTV should not be used in changing rooms, restrooms, and office areas due to the expectation of privacy. Some office settings, such as in the healthcare industry, keep patient data on their computers or desks and should not be visible on camera due to HIPAA.
Global positioning devices should only be used for employees who have access to company assets outside of a facility. For example, using GPS to track company vehicles protects both the company and the employee. Any other uses for such technology should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis based on the industry.
As always, the risk versus reward should be considered when using social media, CCTV, and global positioning devices as it relates to employees.
References:
Jeske, D. &. (2016). Using social media content for screening in recruitment and selection: pros and cons. Work, Employment & Society, 535-546

John 

Hello Professor and Classmates,
1. Should employers be allowed to monitor computer, Internet, email and telephone use by employees?
In short, yes employers should be allowed to monitor the usage of employees on computers, internet, email and telephones. With that being said, the devices that they are monitoring need to have been issued by the employer. When an employee is on company time or company equipment, then that employee has an obligation to adhere to the organizational policies set forth by the employer.
The employer also has an obligation to ensure that the employee understands clearly, in written guidance what is permitted and not permitted on these devices. It should not be a guessing game or a “You never told us” response from employees. Misperception or not knowing cannot be acceptable when equipment and organization information is potentially on the line due to misusing of devices by employees.
According to American Management Staff (2019) over 50% of employees surveyed by 28% of organizations were fired due to violation of company policy or inappropriate language while using the internet or work e-mail. That’s a staggering number to think about.
2. Should employers utilize closed-circuit television (CCTV) and global positioning technologies to collect information on employees? Why?
CCTV in the workplace and public for that matter may be more prevalent than ever before. The enhanced safety and security that it brings to the table is quite obvious. Employers may face some lash back from employees due to privacy concerns, but it won’t stop them from doing it. As technology and cloud databases enhance, it allows for employers more easily to monitor the workspace 24/7.
This is beneficial should any incidents occur (i.e. fire, theft, active shooter, etc.). There could be potential for the system to be hacked, so employers need to think about this, and have their cyber experts ensure this will not occur.
The major pro here? There is documented evidence should any incident occur. As long as the footage is not obstructed or lost that is. This can be useful for future training as well. For instance with Loss prevention specialists, when real life theft occurs, the incident can be scrutinized and the positives and negatives can become good training points for the future.
So I think there is enough evidence in positive side than in the negative side for CCTV’s in the workplace. They are not going away, and most of us probably work in environments where they exist (I sure do).
In terms of GPS tracking, this should only be used for the proper jobs. Meaning, individuals that are driving company cars or out on company business. It may be a good way to track the route of sales people for instance. It can be logged and saved for future references. I don’t think any employee that means well would really have an issue with this. If you’re on your company’s time / dime, then you should expect that they want to know where you are or if you’re deviating. Other than that, I do not see any reason for an organization to need to know where you are.
3. How can a security and loss prevention practitioner leverage the capabilities of social media to enhance job performance in protecting people and assets?
By ensuring that there is compliance in place for what goes on to social media. The specific sharing of company information or sensitive information in relation to the company should not go on to social media. Posting too much information can draw the wrong type of attention to the organization. The loss prevention practitioner should ensure that all individuals are aware of the risks involved with social media.
Keeping postings and dealings in line with company policy is critical to protecting the people and assets of the organization.
John
References
The Latest on Workplace Monitoring and Surveillance. (2019, April 8). Retrieved December 11, 2019, from https://www.amanet.org/articles/the-latest-on-workplace-monitoring-and-surveillance/.