Privacy Issues in the Workplace

Anderson v. State Personnel Board A police department was justified in terminating a highway patrol officer for intentionally appearing nude in sight of neighborhood women and children on numerous occasions over a period of time. The officer lost his credibility with allied law enforcement agencies and his peers, and brought embarrassment to the department. 523 Fleisher v. City of Signal Hill A police department also lawfully terminated an officer who had engaged in sexual conduct with a minor explorer scout while they were both explorer scouts in the department. The department had an interest in ensuring that minor girls who join the explorer program did not become the victims of statutory rape as a result of their participation in the program. The department also had an interest in protecting injury to its reputation and the morale of the department. 524 Fugate v. Phoenix Civil Service Board A police department was justified in terminating vice officers for having sexual relations with prostitutes. The department demonstrated that the off-duty conduct created conflicts of interest and a possibility of blackmail. Further, it undermined the department’s internal morale and community reputation. 525 A police officer’s continuing association with a convicted felon in violation of department rules has also satisfied the grounds for lawful termination. In Bailey v. City of National City , the officer had been warned to cease his contacts with a close friend, to no avail. The court supported the termination decisions on the basis that associating with a felon could bring disrepute upon an officer by tempting him not to impartially perform his duties, or by conveying the impression that law enforcement might not be even-handed. The officer’s disregard of departmental rules and direct orders was also a factor considered by the court, as they were viewed as undermining the command structure’s reliance on obedience to rules and directives. 526 Employers should keep in mind that courts recognize a significant difference between job-relatedness of off-duty conduct in the case of law enforcement employees and non-safety employees. There is generally no nexus between an employee’s private, off-duty use of illegal drugs or alcohol as long as it does not involve on-the-job impairment. In Vielehr v. State Personnel Board , 527 the court considered the issue of whether a state tax representative trainee with the Department of Human Resources was properly dismissed for his conviction of possession of marijuana while off-duty. The court reversed and remanded the case to the trial court on the grounds that no obvious relationship existed between possession of marijuana off-duty and the duties of a tax representative trainee. An exception to this general rule exists, however, for sworn peace officers and safety-sensitive positions, discussed more fully in the section on drug and alcohol testing.

Privacy Issues in the Workplace ©2019 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 160