Exam 4: Employee Privacy Rights in the 21st Century

In the Ringelberg v. Vanguard decision , the court cited the United States Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Jones, in which it held that monitoring a person's movements using a GPS tracking device implicates the Fourth Amendment, suggesting that Ringelberg had a ____________ in his daily movements in his car.

In West v. C.J. Prestman Company , the plaintiffs alleged:

Identify the entities covered under HIPPA.

The knowledge or reckless disregard of the falsity of a communication is known as slander.

Ringelberg v. Vanguard and West v, C.J. Prestman Company are both cases concerning intrusion into the plaintiffs' right of:

What is HIPAA?

Monitoring of behavior from a distance by means of electronic equipment or other means of technology is known as surveillance.

What does surveillance and eavesdropping mean?

Reasonable suspicion for substance abuse:

In legal parlance, EAP stands for:

What is the unifying element of the four separate privacy torts?

Under what circumstances may private and public sector employers monitor employees' use of employer-owned computers?

Describe privacy concerns in the context of third-party information request.

Background checks are usually an easy task for most employers and labor unions.

Employees of private corporations have common law and statutory privacy protections against:

Drug testing is mandatory under the Drug-Free Workplace Act for employers who work in:

Ruth, an employee of a private sector company, was found violating company policy which strictly prohibited employees from using drugs or alcohol within company premises. Ruth was referred to the Employee Assistance Program, which she deliberately refused. This act most likely resulted in:

Justifiably suspecting a person, based on facts or circumstances, of inappropriate or criminal activities is termed:

The Human Resource (HR)department of a company maintains employee personal files. Bradley, an employee of a leather manufacturing company was terminated by his supervisor on the basis of facts that were found in the file. Considering this scenario, who else, apart from the HR department and supervisors, are allowed access to employee personal files?

Why does genetic testing of employees present an ethical dilemma?