Professional Ethics – Social Networking Essay Example

were previously notified that there is no expectation of privacy. The policy asserts that all network activity, such as e-mails and Internet usage, can be monitored and logged by the City without warning. Users were directly advised to not expect any privacy or confidentiality when using these resources. While text messages were not explicitly mentioned in the policy, it was clear that they would be treated in a similar manner as e-mails.

Quan acknowledged the policy and made a choice based solely on its literal interpretation, disregarding its intended message. Quan had previously agreed to the policy, thereby waiving any expectation of privacy. DesJardin emphasizes the importance of determining whether employees genuinely comprehend and willingly agree to the potential compromise of their personal information (p. 144).

Jeff Quan was fortunate in this situation because a loophole allowed him to escape negative consequences. Meanwhile, both Swann and Leone were terminated from their jobs for their Facebook posts. One could argue that they shouldn't have been surprised that their employers would read their online content. It is uncertain whether Colvin was aware of or gave permission for his pictures to be shared on Facebook.

When participating on a social networking site like Facebook, Swann and Leone give up some of their right to privacy, which raises concerns. According to DesJardin, limiting the access of personal information to only those with a personal relationship is crucial in order to maintain personal integrity and individuality (p. 142).

Swann and Leone have openly voiced their discontent, relinquishing control over the information flow. The adverse remarks they made, whether communicated via Facebook or email to their superior, carry the potential to jeopardize their job prospects.

Nevertheless, it is crucial to ponder upon whether employers possess the authority to dismiss employees solely on grounds of dissatisfaction. By following appropriate protocols and conducting impartial evaluations, the employees could have presented a strong argument for retaining their positions. Furthermore, one can contend that their unfavorable comments concerning the organization are detached from their employment agreement and bear no influence on their performance.

The employees were not aware that their comments would be recorded and used without their consent, potentially impacting their behavior. Similarly, Colvin relinquished control of his personal information by participating on Facebook. However, there is a distinction between Colvin and Swann and Leone because Colvin did not share the incriminating photo; they incriminated themselves. Additionally, Colvin's misconduct affected his job performance as he was caught lying to avoid work. Although he did not personally post the evidence, he should have been cautious about the potential consequences on Facebook, especially after attending a Halloween party where many photos are typically shared.

It is important for employees to be conscious of the information being circulated about them in order to protect their privacy. If personal data has the potential to be accessible by the public, employees should take measures to restrict its distribution. An instance illustrating this is when an acquaintance decided to remove all contacts from recent interactions as a precautionary measure against any pictures of their activities appearing online. Although this may appear excessive, they took necessary steps to safeguard their private information and avoid its exposure on Facebook.

Both the Swann and Leone cases revolved around employers disregarding employees' rights to clarify or contest decisions. I firmly advocate for adhering to due process

in such instances. The employees in question neither divulged confidential information nor harmed their respective companies; rather, their remarks merely reflected general discontent that any employee might voice at any given time. Moreover, they were never informed that their Facebook activities could impact their employment status. When employers misuse their authority and terminate employees without legitimate reasons, they devalue them as replaceable resources.

From this viewpoint, a company deems an employee valuable until their termination. Decisions regarding the dismissal of such an important individual should be made with caution. Therefore, the company is obliged to ensure equitable treatment for itself. Even though the managers had the power to fire Swann and Leone, they lacked the required authorization.

In my opinion, a corporation has an obligation to both the government and society in terms of due process. If there is no employment, these two entities can become dependent on the state. It is crucial for the company to assess whether terminating an employee and hiring someone new would result in enhanced job performance. Choosing due process would likely be a more cost-effective and efficient solution compared to bringing in a new employee. Moreover, if you disagree with how employers handle these situations, kindly explain why. Similar to the prisoner's dilemma in game theory, the company will prioritize its own interests while the employee will strive for personal benefit; they will achieve equilibrium through cooperation.

This will lead to the best outcome for both parties involved. However, I cannot solely evaluate a company's treatment of these employees as they prioritize their own well-being. It would be advantageous for both employees and employers to establish a fair procedure, even if it

may be challenging for either side to identify it. Furthermore, most companies acknowledge the significance of their employees and can distinguish those who are genuinely valuable. If these employees had a notable impact on the company's success, a more comprehensive assessment process would be necessary to determine if termination is justified.

The current escapades of Charlie Sheen serve as an example. The ratings that directly contribute to his role on 'Two and a Half Men' are highly valued by CBS. However, CBS did not terminate the seasons based solely on one tweet or Facebook post. If you were in charge of hiring employees, would you consider using a Website like Facebook to gather information about them? Personally, I have used and will continue to use available information when making hiring decisions. In my opinion, companies should have values and a philosophy. Information obtained through social networking platforms and the internet can provide an accurate depiction of an employee's values and philosophy, despite any biases. At the very least, it allows you to assess their intelligence level; after all, Facebook is not new and it is relatively easy to restrict unauthorized individuals from accessing your private information.

If an individual's behavior on Facebook is deemed inappropriate for their company, it should not be displayed on their profile. If someone fails to realize the ramifications of publicly sharing a photo of themselves using drugs, they are unsuitable to work with me. As previously mentioned, upon joining Facebook, individuals are aware that their information is linked to everyone they know; thus, it becomes their duty to regulate what they share. Naturally, I would inform applicants that I will be reviewing

their social media presence during the application process.