ETHICAL DILEMMA 2: Bounty Hunters His SUV carefully obscured behind a row of trees, Rick Raymond, private investigator, was on another case. This case was not to catch the unfaithful spouse or petty criminal in action. Instead, Raymond was tracking an employee, at the request of an employer, to determine whether an Orlando repairman was sick as he claimed today and as he had claimed to be several times recently. As we have seen, absenteeism is a huge problem for organizations that has left them desperate for solutions. One solution is to investigate. In the typical routine, when an employee calls in sick, the employer asks for the reason. If the reason is illness, and illness has been the reason for an abnormal number of times in the past, the employer hires a P.I. to follow the employee and photograph or videotape his or her activity outside the house. Private investigators also are used to ascertain whether individuals filing injury claims (and drawing worker’s compensation benefits) are in fact injured. It may surprise you to learn that a recent court decision indicated hiring a private investigator to follow an employee is legal. In this particular case, Diana Vail was fired by Raybestos Products, an automotive parts manufacturer in Crawfordsville, Indiana, after an off-duty police officer hired by Raybestos produced evidence that she was abusing her sick-leave benefits. The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that such investigations were legal. Despite their legality, such investigations are controversial. Oracle and Hewlett-Packard have reportedly used private investigators to follow managers or uncover the source of leaks. Both actions spawned negative media coverage. There is no doubt, though, that some employees do abuse their sick-leave benefits. In an earlier case, Raymond investigated an employee who called in sick with the flu for 3 days. Raymond discovered that she actually visited Orlando theme parks on each of those days. When Raymond showed her three time-stamped pictures of herself on rides, the employee’s first response was, “That’s not me!” In another case, Raymond caught a worker constructing an elaborate scheme to call in sick and go on a cruise. “When he was shown the video surveillance I’d done, he actually said to his boss, ‘I can’t believe you’d be so sneaky.’ ” Raymond said. “The hypocrisy is amazing.” Questions If you had reason to believe someone was lying about an absence from work, do you think it would be appropriate to investigate? If excessive absenteeism is a real problem in an organization, are there alternatives to surveillance? If so, what are they, and do they have any limitations of their own?

ETHICAL DILEMMA 2: Bounty Hunters

His SUV carefully obscured behind a row of trees, Rick Raymond, private investigator, was on another case. This case was not to catch the unfaithful spouse or petty criminal in action. Instead, Raymond was tracking an employee, at the request of an employer, to determine whether an Orlando repairman was sick as he claimed today and as he had claimed to be several times recently.

As we have seen, absenteeism is a huge problem for organizations that has left them desperate for solutions. One solution is to investigate. In the typical routine, when an employee calls in sick, the employer asks for the reason. If the reason is illness, and illness has been the reason for an abnormal number of times in the past, the employer hires a P.I. to follow the employee and photograph or videotape his or her activity outside the house. Private investigators also are used to ascertain whether individuals filing injury claims (and drawing worker’s compensation benefits) are in fact injured.

It may surprise you to learn that a recent court decision indicated hiring a private investigator to follow an employee is legal. In this particular case, Diana Vail was fired by Raybestos Products, an automotive parts manufacturer in Crawfordsville, Indiana, after an off-duty police officer hired by Raybestos produced evidence that she was abusing her sick-leave benefits. The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that such investigations were legal.

Despite their legality, such investigations are controversial. Oracle and Hewlett-Packard have reportedly used private investigators to follow managers or uncover the source of leaks. Both actions spawned negative media coverage.

There is no doubt, though, that some employees do abuse their sick-leave benefits. In an earlier case, Raymond investigated an employee who called in sick with the flu for 3 days. Raymond discovered that she actually visited Orlando theme parks on each of those days. When Raymond showed her three time-stamped pictures of herself on rides, the employee’s first response was, “That’s not me!” In another case, Raymond caught a worker constructing an elaborate scheme to call in sick and go on a cruise. “When he was shown the video surveillance I’d done, he actually said to his boss, ‘I can’t believe you’d be so sneaky.’ ” Raymond said. “The hypocrisy is amazing.”

Questions

1. If you had reason to believe someone was lying about an absence from work, do you think it would be appropriate to investigate?
2. If excessive absenteeism is a real problem in an organization, are there alternatives to surveillance? If so, what are they, and do they have any limitations of their own?