Our panel this morning has a range of speakers who will explore the nature of privacy in the work place and the extent to which eroding it can be justified.

In conducting a consultation on a proposed code of practice for employers in the UK, we became aware that there are those who consider that there should be no right to privacy in the work place.  They would argue that protection of business is incompatible with respect for private life.  Such a stance is not new.  The paternalistic approach of factory and mill owners in England in the 19^th century left little room for private life.  More recently there are examples of employers who consider the private lives of their employees their business.  Henry Ford is reputed to have required “my staff to have unblemished private lives”.   

Today employers are often required by law to show they have taken reasonable steps to protect staff from harassment, and from other forms of racial or sexual discrimination.  They have vicarious liability for a range of wrongful acts committed by their employees in the course of employment.  Can those risks for the employee be addressed without breaching the privacy of the employee?

Does the fundamental right to privacy for individuals, while at work allow some monitoring of employees?  If it does, how much? 

The development of technology means that surveillance is more intrusive, and can readily be more prevalent than in the past.  Drug and alcohol testing can be done more simply, and cheaply.  At the same time mobile technology makes the distinction between home and work ever more blurred.

How should the balance between private life and the need for ‘corporate knowledge’ be struck?  What are the appropriate safeguards?