Introduction


Progress in information technology has given rise to its use in collection and manipulation of data with an efficiency never dreamed possible before. Today data are collected and processed almost everywhere and at every moment. This ubiquity of electronic data collection and processing does not take place only on the visible scale, as when we use an ATM machine or when we check out items from the grocery store using the barcode system, but data gathering enters our lives in a more insidious manner, in a way that a typical layperson is hardly in a position to know that information about him or her could be collected, processed, and sold. When a layperson logs on to the Internet, he or she usually visits Web sites, many of which are known for their attempts to place so-called cookies in the user s computer. These little texts record the user s pattern of Internet use, such as which Web sites the user likes to visit, what types of things the user purchases online, and so on. E- mails quite easily can be read by those for whom they are not intended. This has given opportunities for eavesdropping and possible archiving of private communication and data. There are even programs that record how many keystrokes are hit at a period of time, and in what patterns. Moreover, in countries such as the UK, video surveillance of public places has become rather common. In Thailand video cameras are installed in most public places, especially in jewelry shops , in order to deter crime. While such a policy may have its advantage in ensuring public order, there are concerns that the use of technology that can record personal details might lead to attempts to gain unfair and unethical advantages from it. Perhaps a clear illustration of the use of data gathering and recording technology to manage people s lives can be seen in the current attempt of the Thai government to provide each citizen with a smart ID card containing important personal data such as a personal identification (ID) number (each Thai citizen is given a unique ID number that must be provided each time he or she contacts a public agency), housing registration, health insurance status, marital status, and so on. The project, called the Smart ID Card Project, was initiated by the Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, in February 2002, with the aim of giving Thais the status of e- citizens . The IC-chip card is a multi-function card containing personal ID, fingerprint , tax numbers , social welfare, social security, agricultural data, and personal healthcare data (Card for E-Citizens, 2003). Chances for possible unfair and unethical practices are daunting; besides, these cards could turn into a source of lucrative profits for companies who figure out how to take advantage of the data. Surveillance of people is not limited only to public places; in fact, the practice has become more common in business organizations. An article in Worklife (Electronic monitoring, 1999) details the benefits and threats of electronic monitoring; it gives the following reasons for monitoring employees: performance review, legal compliance, and cost control. However, the practice poses a threat, real or potential, to the employees who have their privacy rights compromised. In a relentless effort to boost productivity and return on investment, managers have been prone to use the new technologies to look over the shoulders of their employees to see if they are performing their duties with maximum effort, and if they are wasting the company s time doing something else not related to their jobs. As in the previous era where supervisors and managers looked over the workers from above the factory floor, nowadays technologies are available to conduct surveillance in the workplace in a much more sophisticated manner. This use of information technology to record and manipulate personal data and to keep an eye on the workers is potentially not limited to the West. As economies elsewhere, especially in East and Southeast Asia, become more advanced, such uses can easily spread there, too, if they have not already. In this chapter I will offer a perspective from Asia on the issue of electronic surveillance in the workplace. More specifically , I will offer how a Buddhist views such matters. The goal is to offer a sketch of norms intended to contribute to the discussion on how best to go about this issue. As there is a worldwide debate and discussion on how electronic surveillance in the workplace should be done, or whether it should be done at all, my goal is to add cultural dimensions to this debate and discussion. The norms to be introduced, together with a brief sketch of justificatory theory, are offered under an assumption that norms work best when they are not cut off from the cultural milieu from which they emerge, or when they, so to speak, are homegrown. Furthermore, as most economies in East and Southeast Asia are Buddhist or related to Buddhism to a large degree, an account of the Buddhist perspective on electronic surveillance in the workplace seems to be in order. In any case, the norms to be introduced here are not intended only for East Asia, but could serve as a basis for further discussion on electronic surveillance in general also.

My argument is basically this: According to a certain strand of Buddhism, the ideal situation regarding human relations is such that there should be no coercive rules or laws forcing how a human being should act toward another. [1] Rules for conduct in Buddhism are those that purport to describe an ethically ideal situation, and are not intended as purely normative rules. According to the Venerable Prayutto, Thailand s most respected Buddhist monk and scholar, Sila [set of precepts aiming at helping the followers to attain liberation, which is the ultimate goal of Buddhism] is determined according to natural law; those who follow it need to see the interrelationship of all things in a systematic way (Prayutto, 1986,p. 762). What this means is that the Sila is ultimately descriptive statements that describe what it is like in reality; those who see the reality as it really is and act accordingly are said to follow the Sila , thereby entering a path toward liberation or nirvana. Ven. Prayutto also adds that the mental condition of those who do not think of trespassing, do not think of harming other beings ”that is the Sila (Prayutto, 1986,p. 767). At first stage, the Sila can look like norms or precepts in that it helps guide the conduct of the followers, but once they arrive at the destination, seeing things really as they are, these norms reveal their true identities as only descriptive statements.

The Buddhist idea that what one should do lies in what one actually is might seem at first sight to be a recipe for disaster. For without normative rules, where should a governing set of ethical norms be found that can bind people together? Besides, if there are no rules, then how could one know how to act? And will this not contradict what is said in the previous paragraph about a set of norms that are more suitable to East and Southeast Asia? However, to a Buddhist, the absence of clearly specific law does not necessarily lead to chaos because it is the quality of one s own mind and the development of one s quality as an ethical person that is more important. Here, the normative force of law becomes the descriptive sense in that the laws, in the ideal Buddhist situation, ultimately serve only as a describing role of how people behave toward one another. In other words, according to the Buddhist view, the distinction between what should be done and what is actually done are blurred toward each other. Hence, if employers and employees act toward each other in such an ideal situation where, for example, employers are kind to their employees, they trust that their employees will do the work to the best of their abilities , and employees believe that their employers are always acting on their behalf , will protect the former s interests, and are not going to maximize their own profits without caring for the employees, then there is no need for rules and certainly no need for surveillance, electronic or otherwise . In this ideal situation, there is a common sense of ownership and loyalty to the organization that is shared by employees and employers alike. The Buddhist view is that such common feeling of ownership or belonging to the organization is typical of the idea of interconnectedness of all beings. Hence, the task is not to put in more electronic surveillance systems if productivity and, more importantly, flourishing and well being of both the organization and the individuals in it are to be the issue. The task is rather to reduce and ultimately eliminate any need for such a device altogether, without thereby losing productivity. Ironically enough, this reduction and eventual elimination might well increase productivity for the reasons that will be given below. This atmosphere of no surveillance can only be done in a place where everyone feels safe, trusted, and respected. The argument above is supported by a contention that the boundary between public and private spaces is beginning to blur. Basing on Nissenbaum s (1998) and Smithsimon s (2003) arguments that one is entitled to a certain degree of informational privacy even in public space, I argue that the usual argument to the effect that one should expect that information about oneself can be obtained for the sake of public safety should be countered by this blurring together of the public and private spaces, which renders such an argument problematic .

In the end, a possible set of norms to be introduced to solve the surveillance problem has to start with the realization that everything, including the workplace, is interconnected and interdependent. This means that the relations between management and workers have to be based more on a kind of close familial relationship, where the atmosphere is permeated by trust and respect, rather than simply faceless, contractual relationships.

My argument here naturally touches upon the issue of privacy rights, especially in the current debate on privacy in public places. The idea to be advanced here is that since privacy presupposes autonomy of the individual, this does not conflict with the Buddhist teachings insofar as the teachings aim at attaining salvation through individual effort alone. Moreover, Buddhism opposes intrusions of privacy, since this means that one tries to gain an unfair advantage over another individual, and such action is usually accompanied by greed, anger, or delusion, all the defilements of the mind that are to be eliminated if one is intent on going along the Buddhist path. And since there are spheres in which people are entitled to a limited extent of privacy, even when they are in a traditionally public domain, intrusion of this privacy in public places has its limits too. The argument is that, according to Buddhism, development of mental quality is of paramount importance, and such acts of spying and surveillance do not seem to fit in with a developed attitude.

In order to argue for this conclusion in detail, I will in the next section first discuss some works that have been done on the topic. More specifically, I will discuss the works of Gary Marx, David Lyon, Nick Taylor, and Helen Nissenbaum, among others, on the issue of privacy and surveillance. While these scholars attempt to lay out a course for acceptable use of surveillance in public places, they tend to neglect the quality of mind of the individuals involved, as well as the individual s development. It is precisely the Buddhist emphasis on development of one s mental quality that, in my view, makes it a significant contribution to the debate and discussion on electronic surveillance.

[1] I refer here to the strand of Buddhism practiced in Thailand, which is Theravada (meaning Doctrine of the Elders ). There are two major sects of Buddhism, Theravada and Mahayana (Greater Vehicle). The former is practiced mainly in Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia, and Sri Lanka, while the latter can be found in Vietnam, China, Korea, and Japan. The major difference between the two sects is that while Theravada focuses only on the original teaching of the Buddha as the sole source of teachings, the latter also recognizes the authorities of later teachers apart from the Buddha himself. The name Doctrine of the Elders, in fact, refers to the works of the group of monks that preserved the original teachings of the Buddha. Mahayana, or the Greater Vehicle, on the other hand, is so called because they believe that their practice can bring more people to Liberation than the other sect. In fact, Theravada Buddhism is also known as Lesser Vehicle, but that is slightly pejorative.




Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace. Controversies and Solutions
Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace: Controversies and Solutions
ISBN: 1591404568
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2005
Pages: 161

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net