108. “Employees should not have full access to their own personnel files. If, for example, employees were allowed to see certain
confidential1 materials, the people supplying that information would not be likely to express their opinions
candidly2.”
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
condor3 of those supplying information. To some extent, I agree with this viewpoint. Although employees are entitled to be
accurately4 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
pertinent5 to (adj. 与..有关的) 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
supervisors6 will often find it difficult to give frank criticism of underachievers (n. 成就过小者,在学业方面未发挥潜力的学生) or to report
troublemakers7. So although employees have
legitimate8 claims to know what has been said about them, they are not always entitled to know who said it.
Secondly9, employers are obligated to control some information when their employees are accursed of unlawful conduct. Since employers are responsible for wrongdoing (不正当行为;坏事) at the workplace, they must investigate charges of, for example, drug activity, possession of firearms, or
harassment10. But again, without assurances of
anonymity11, accusers may be less
forthright12. Furthermore, they may be in
jeopardy13 of
retaliation14 by the accused. So while workers under
investigation15 may be generally informed about complaints or reports, they should not know who filed them. Even so, employers do not enjoy an
unlimited16 right to gather and keep confidential information about employees. For example, it would be unjust to investigate an employee’s political viewpoints, religious preference, or sexual
orientation17. Such invasions of privacy are not warranted by an employer’s 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
candor18 and prevent retaliation against information sources. At the same time, employers have no right to
solicit19 or secure information about the private lives of their workers.