108. Employees should not have full access to their own personnel files. If, for example, employees were allowed to see certain confidential materials, the people supplying that information would not be likely to express their opinions candidly.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
The issue is whether employees should have full access to their own personnel files. The speaker claims that they should not, pointing out that such access could diminish the condor of those supplying information. To some extent, I agree with this viewpoint. Although employees are entitled to be accurately informed about the substance of performance reviews or complaints in their files, at times there will be good reason not to identify information sources.
First of all, employers have a right to control some information pertinent to their business success. Unproductive or uncooperative workers can seriously harm an organization; for this reason, employers need to have accurate information about employee performance. But when employees have full access to their own personnel files, co-workers and even supervisors will often find it difficult to give frank criticism of underachievers or to report troublemakers. So although employees have legitimate claims to know what has been said about them, they are not always entitled to know who said it.
Secondly, employers are obligated to control some information when their employees are accursed of unlawful conduct. Since employers are responsible for wrongdoing at the workplace, they must investigate charges of, for example, drug activity, possession of firearms, or harassment. But again, without assurances of anonymity, accusers may be less forthright. Furthermore, they may be in jeopardy of retaliation by the accused. So while workers under investigation may be generally informed about complaints or reports, they should not know who filed them. Even so, employers do not enjoy an unlimited right to gather and keep confidential information about employees. For example, it would be unjust to investigate an employees political viewpoints, religious preference, or sexual orientation. Such invasions of privacy are not warranted by an employers right to performance-related information, or duty to protect the workplace from criminal wrongdoing.
In conclusion, limiting employee access to personnel files is sometimes warranted to encourage candor and prevent retaliation against information sources. At the same time, employers have no right to solicit or secure information about the private lives of their workers.
托福口语之语段朗读法
体坛资讯:Richards to meet an example, Liu Xiang to set an example
2016大学英语六级新题型听力解读
体坛资讯:Yao Ming keen on bearing flag for China at Beijing Olympics
体坛资讯:Yi agent seeks trade but NBA Bucks want Chinese star
体坛资讯:Henman tops Moya to advance at Wimbledon
国内英语资讯:Chinese naval fleet visits Malaysia to enhance military ties
托福3个月养成计划
2017雅思考试时间
国内英语资讯:G20 warns of risks hurting global economy, financial markets
省时省力的居家清洁小妙招
国内英语资讯:Indonesia to send delegation to Chinas Hangzhou to learn lake management
四级听力技巧之学会比较
英文歌曲之Your firefly
国内英语资讯:Chinese spending on shopping, food hit record high during National Day holiday
国内英语资讯:Chinese premier to meet leaders of Portuguese-speaking countries in Macao
体坛资讯:Chinese badminton stars to attend Thailand Open GP gold
英文歌曲之I'm not the only one
体坛资讯:Gay wins 100m in years fastest 9.84 sec
体坛资讯:Late starters face uphill task in China
英文歌之Happy
体坛资讯:China prepare for Asian Cup semi-final showdown: coach
英文歌曲之Hallelujah
英文歌曲之Yankee Doodle
研究:坐过山车能排出肾结石?
托福口语中的20个否定句例子
2017年托福考试时间表
四级听力技巧之认清逻辑
老外是如何说“怂”的!
体坛资讯:Vietnam jails referees, officials in bribery scam
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |