Workplace Privacy
Employment Law · Lesson 11
Workplace Privacy
這一課問的是：僱主是否不當侵犯員工之工作場所隱私？
ActorActObjectStandardConsequence
Issue · what this lesson is really about
Has the employer impermissibly invaded the employee's workplace privacy?
這一課問的是：僱主是否不當侵犯員工之工作場所隱私？
Trigger words & phrases that should flag this issue:
monitoremailsurveillancedrug testsocial media
Core Terminology · 7 must-know
Tap a card to flip and reveal the meaning.
workplace privacy
Tap to see meaning
Limited expectation of privacy in workplace.
工作場所隱私。
electronic monitoring
Tap to see meaning
Email, internet, video surveillance.
電子監控。
ECPA
Tap to see meaning
Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
ECPA。
drug testing
Tap to see meaning
Mostly permitted under state law; pre-employment, post-accident, random for safety-sensitive.
藥檢。
polygraph
Tap to see meaning
Federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act limits private employer use.
測謊法限制。
social media
Tap to see meaning
NLRA may protect concerted social-media activity; state laws limit employer access to personal accounts.
社交媒體。
background check
Tap to see meaning
Fair Credit Reporting Act requires notice and authorization.
背景調查。
Rule Sentence · the workhorse
Employees generally have a reduced but not eliminated expectation of privacy in the workplace; employers may monitor electronic communications with notice but must comply with the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, drug testing is permitted under state law with limits, and background checks under the Fair Credit Reporting Act require disclosure and authorization.
Sentence Anatomy · 5 roles, 5 colors
Every rule sentence breaks into five visual roles.
Actor 行為人employer僱主
Act 行為monitoring/testing employees監控/檢測員工
Object 對象employee privacy interest員工隱私利益
Standard 法律標準reasonable expectation + statutes合理期望 + 法律
Consequence 後果lawful or invasion合法 或 侵犯
Casebook Snapshot · a real American case
City of Ontario v. Quon
Holding. A public employer's review of employee's text messages on employer-issued pager was reasonable under the special-needs doctrine, given legitimate purpose and reasonable scope; the Court declined to articulate clear privacy rules for new technology workplaces.
Why it matters. Quon shows the limited privacy expectations on employer-provided equipment, even in public employment.
Quon：僱主提供設備上之隱私期望有限。
Common Mistakes · what trips students
✗ employees 無 expectation of privacy。
✓ Some privacy survives (personal communications, restrooms, bags).
部分隱私仍存（私人通訊、廁所、個人物品）。
Mini IRAC · build the Application
Issue. Has D violated P's privacy by reading P's personal emails sent through D's email system, where D's policy stated the system was for business use and monitored?
Rule. Employees have reduced privacy expectations on employer systems, particularly where employer policy provides notice of monitoring.
Application (model). D's policy explicitly stated the email system was for business use and was monitored. Because employer monitoring with notice generally does not violate privacy expectations on employer-owned systems, the fact that D provided clear notice in policy and the emails were on D's system means P had reduced privacy expectation.
Pick the right element for each blank:
g1.
g2.
Conclusion. Therefore, D's review of the emails likely does not violate P's privacy.
MBE Check · multiple choice
D, a private employer, requires P to take a polygraph test as a condition of employment for an accounting position. Lawful?
Practice Drill · tap to build the rule
Drop the chips here in correct order:
Tap chips to add → tap chips in the target to remove: