Let's have a royal tea party to discuss naked sipp'in tea and eatting weiners and pussy!

Xoxo!

Deep Subject:  



Consider this: nearly 12.4 million people in Shenzhen, China will have residency cards fitted with computer chips containing their name, address, work history, educational background, religion, ethnicity, police record, medical insurance status, and reproductive history. [FN1] The Chinese government also has ordered all large cities to issue such high-tech residency cards to approximately 150 million people who now live in a city but have not yet acquired permanent residency

RFID chips can also be used to track employees. They can be implanted under an employee's skin,
worn in an employee's clothing, or attached to an identification badge. The most widespread workplace use of RFID technology is chip-embedded staff identification (“ID”) badges, which are primarily used for controlled access to an employer's premises.

Is this against our 1st Amendment rights?  
But also NOTE:
At this point, most nongovernment employees in the United States are exposed to a variety of forms of monitoring, including drug testing, closed circuit video filming, monitoring calls with clients or customers, monitoring e-mail and computer input and transmissions, using GPS systems in company cars and company phones, and personality and psychological testing. There is no comprehensive
right to privacy for employees in American workplaces regarding electronic monitoring.

What are your thoughts ....... Turn off your I-phone!!  Would be a start!!

JC

Good questions, JC. The Constitution gives us the right to "be secure in our persons and posessions," but nowhere does it mention privacy. RFID chips are only as informative as the information placeed on them. In the USA, uou should probably have to sign a waiver of some sorts to have your data, and only data you and your employer or card issuer, agree to have on the chip. In order to be offered employment, to gain access to offices or locations, or any other lawful purpose, you agree to carry a chip with the specified data.

In China, a dictatorship, the government tells you that you must have the chip, and it determines what information shall be on it. Their RFID chip's purpose is to control citizens (subjects).

In the USA, private enterprise or, if government, an employer and you mutually decide what shall be available. It's for access and selected security control, not personal control. That's quite a difference.

private employers can legally monitor all use of their equipment and facilities, all communications whether electronic or voice, not to mention visual monitoring of all areas on their properties. There is no implicit right to privacy in the workplace and it's safe to assume that all of our activities are being monitored. Pinhole cameras are becoming increasingly popular and can be placed in a ceiling tile or light fixture or just about anywhere for that matter. Think of the ramifications...

One area that interests me is the use of a personal cell phone or computer in an employer facility. Specifically, a piece of electronic equipment that is not the employer's property and does not use the employer's communications systems. A good example is your own personal cell phone which connects to a tower outside of the employer's property. Can an employer legally monitor your conversation on your own phone and use that conversation against you in a subsequent job action just because the conversation was carried out on their property? My guess is yes as wrong as it seems. Another example is a personal laptop used on company property and connected to a publicly available wireless internet connection, say, a nearby Starbucks, rather than the employer's wireless network. Does the employer get to view your private screen via a pinhole camera because you're on their premises? Again, I believe the answer is yes because something on your screen could create an offensive or harassing environment for other employees.

-- Modified on 4/28/2011 8:16:50 PM

that's what makes America great!  It doesnt matter whether it violates your rights or not.  They dont care.  Thinking they do, well that's old school thinking.

Cool

I wrote a paper talking about a MINT card...(Medical Information in No Time).  Though I didn't know it at the time some of my controls are very similar to what HiPAA implements. Anytime information is read off the card, a log record was created.  In the US, employees relinquish rights as a condition of employment, versus someone simply monitoring your movements and the like. Most of the monitoring of employees now is to fight lawsuits.  Now, will IPass scans check the time between checkpoints to see if you are speeding?  Will Street cameras track and monitor individuals?

Still we live in a Democratic Republic, versus China which is Communist country with capitalism.

'Against' our first amendment rights?    No.   Even if that's not the answer you were hoping ffor or expecting.

One can choose to live 'off the grid' as much as possible in either country (here or there) but you have to be willing to accept the lifestyle that comes with it.

Our first amendment rights give you the right to assemble, speak and publish... it does not protect you against the consequences of saying/printing what you ultimately do.

Take for instance the statement:  "I'd like to kill SOandSo".   Protected first amendment speech; but don't expect anyone to come to your rescue if "SOandSo" comes looking for you.  

That gets me excited to work in the corporate world............ lol
There is a lot for them to look at on my Laptop... (wink)

Kisses
JC

I am glad to be an American but yet "Big Brother is always Watching"

Search and Seizure consideration


That would be a good fight the employer.  Most Corporations would find a probable cause where they would need to observe their employees work time.

Thank you for your help
JC

That would be fun....
I  am hungry this morning ........... lol

Yes, employers can monitor your activity and consider it as a basis for continued employment.  We live in a great country where you, the employee, can tell them to F.Off and you have the freedom to go work somewhere else that does not do this.

It's not a 4th amendment issue either, or a violation of any amendment.

This link to a discussion by the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse might be helpful to you. http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs7-work.htm

The health care privacy act allows for fines of 10,000 dollars per incident should your doctor sharemedical info with anyone.  Ive have to go through multiple levels of security to access information of my own patients.As law stands now I can release no information about you medically to your employer.  Your Medical data is yours. and yours alone.  It can not be released to anyone at least not without a signed and witnessed document.  HIPPA Laws have gotten really specific about patient privacy.  (and they only get tighter each yr.)  I frankly don't see how anyone could be compelled legally to put there medical data on such a insecure system. This has nothing to do with the constitution and everything to do with health care privacy act that is already law.
Doc

There is no right to privacy anymore
Jc

-- Modified on 4/29/2011 10:14:46 AM

I know someone that became unemployed from his texting.  Not because of the content, but the fact that he wasn't doing his job.  He was too busy texting.  (and IM etc)  At some point, it is simply a matter of the person goofing off, which has always been one way of getting fired.

Have you ever considered that the dear old gov could have more than just the flu serum in the shot.  They could have a chip in with the serum just like we do with our pets to keep them from getting lost.  They decide which strain to have manufactured, where it is made and who should get it, next they will make it mandatory or they will withhold health care then they have you under their watchful eye.