There are only a few areas in the workplace where an employee can reasonably expect to have privacy. It is the bathroom and the locker room. The rest of the areas accessible to employees can be monitored by the employers. Based on U.S. laws, employers have the right to monitor the activities of their employees. This is permissible if done in the context of determining productivity, securing intellectual property, and protecting trade secrets. It is only the bathroom and the locker room where employers cannot install any surveillance equipment because what goes on in these areas must remain private and personal. Moreover, there is nothing in there that can significantly affect the productivity of the employees, however, the factory floor, sales area, and other work areas can be monitored, and the activities therein can be recorded.
Understandably many will disagree. For instance, Shelly was a subordinate of Herman, and she expressed her extreme displeasure upon the discovery that her boss used electronic surveillance to eavesdrop on employees. She implied that she is leaving that work because she is protecting something. In this regard, Herman challenged her that if she has nothing to hide then there is nothing wrong with the surveillance system installed in the office. But one can assume that not everything that she did was related to her work. It could have been a habit of hers to call her boyfriend or her husband if she is married, and because she had no idea that there was office surveillance then it is possible that she shared intimate information with her lover. The knowledge that her boss was eavesdropping on her was both a source of embarrassment and offense.