ICT AND EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE POWER DYNAMICS: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE OF UNITED STATES' AND NETHERLANDS' WORKPLACE PRIVACY IN LIGHT OF INFORMATION AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY MONITORING AND POSITIONING OF EMPLOYEES

摘要

The foregoing analysis shows that the U.S. as well as the Dutch legal frameworks regarding Internet and e-mail monitoring, and presumably positioning systems as well, do not provide proper guarantees for employees' privacy. Case analysis shows that ICT tends to shift the balance of power between employers and employees in favor of employers. In the Netherlands, appropriate legal rules seem to be in place, but their practical value is often negligible. With regard to the American system, the legal framework offers less protection than is the case in the Netherlands. The U.S. case-law tends to strongly favor invasion of the employee's privacy so long as the employee is informed of the invasion. As mentioned in section III.D, several changes are needed to improve employee protection. Employee protection is needed in order to regain an acceptable power balance between the employer and the employee. This conclusion holds true for the U.S. as well as for the Netherlands. However, it could also be argued that the American approach towards employer surveillance is justifiable. Why should employers not have an extensive right to check employees' behavior? The employer might be held liable for the employee's behavior, and the employer should be able to check for what activities he is paying wages. Furthermore, the employee is using the employer's property, and the employer should be able to determine and control this use. In other words, the need for privacy protection in the workplace can be doubted. If the employee does not use an employer's property for private purposes, the surveillance of this property cannot invade an employees' private sphere. However, there are several flaws in deferring the employee's right of privacy to the employer's right over his property. First of all, the constant