Are private beliefs the legitimate concern of employers? Essay

Employers should be concerned with most of what there employee believes in, however private beliefs may be taking this too far. An employer should be watchful of their employees, to make sure that they don’t get in to trouble, and are not suffering from stress. It is in the employer’s best interests that this is done so that the employee is the most productive that he or she can be. However in a world where peoples privacy is becoming less and less, is it right for an employer to be concerned with the private beliefs of their employee? I think that it is, because the welfare of the employer and all of the workers could in the most extreme case be in jeopardy. We have controversy concerning employee privacy. Today workers’ every keystroke leaves a trail of information that employers generally have the legal right to examine and use as the basis for disciplinary action against employees. Employees have been fired because of the content of e-mails or for surfing to internet sites deemed inappropriate by the employer. Employees have been forced to supply urine samples for drug testing, given personality tests in job interviews, and secretly videotaped–even in company restrooms. Yet very few laws protect employee privacy; the political power of business has been able to fend off most attempts to limit employer discretion. A few notable exceptions exist– for example, federal law prohibits employers from administering lie-detector tests in job interviews. If an employer is trying to hire a fundamentalist, or a freedom fighter for example, then I think that it is in the employers benefit that they know this information. It is in the interests of the company’s security that this information should be known to them. The worlds growing diversity; cultural, racial, ethnic and religious, poses significant challenges and opportunities for the corporate workplace. The transformation from a relatively homogenous society to the present â€Å"multicultural† situation calls for special efforts to foster a work environment free from intimidation, harassment and discrimination, and which promotes productivity and a strong bottomline. Unfortunately, the very programs designed to reduce problems are actually creating new ones. The issue of â€Å"sexual orientation† within diversity training courses is particularly problematic, and the topic of heated discussions. While there is a genuine need to address the issues raised by employees who identify as gay or lesbian, many current attempts to do so end up discriminating against other employees. Given the strong feelings and sensitivities that surround the subject of private beliefs and feelings, poses a difficult challenge to employers. If business survival depends upon contented and loyal employees who sense that their beliefs and values are respected, then focus upon sexual orientation as a diversity category is clearly counter-productive. For a great many Americans, the â€Å"celebration of diversity† is a thinly disguised attempt to legitimize a behavior that they believe to be immoral and, what is more, to persuade them to change their beliefs. Prudence in the workplace can resolve potential religious discrimination problems before they become legal suits. If an employer is truly seeking to affirm the diversity of the workforce, for both moral and practical reasons, avoidance of all forms of coercive â€Å"sensitivity training†, of whatever kind, should be the norm. Apart from the promotion of specific social agendas, there is no need to require employees to endure lectures, presentations, role playing or simulations that are an affront to deeply held moral and religious beliefs. Civility programs recognize and acknowledge the real differences that exist between people, differences of experience and belief. Yet, in spite of these differences, it is possible to work with others different from oneself in positive and productive ways, even when strongly held beliefs differ and clash. It is possible to be civil toward those with whom we disagree, and to build a significant degree of unity and community in the workplace. For companies who seek to be globally competitive, this is a necessity.