Lecture Notes - Workplace Surveillance

One topic that was mentioned in the online lecture notes in about workplace surveillance. I have made comments about my opinion of workplace surveillance on some people's blogs, but figured I should do a post on my blog.
Workplace Surveillance is a technique an organization uses to impress upon us (the employee) that they (organization) is dominant. As result, computers, phones, pagers, company cars, anything the company owns essentially can and prob will be monitored, not to mention the building/foot traffic can be seen from cameras. The belief is that companies are monitoring their employees to make sure they stay faithful to the company, do their job and not fool around etc. However, in many circumstances I believe this is very wrong and have to agree with the "Critical Theorists" who say that this is intrusive and causes mental and social stress.
Fortunately, I have yet to come across a controlling company that is overstepping, but unfortunately they do exist. In some atmospheres, I can understand some degree of surveillance such as the bank , the fed (if you have seen 'Mad Money', you probably know what I'm referring to) etc. Basically, companies that have something to protect. However, what about small companies, or companies who have employees that don't interact with trade secrets, finances, etc? Why should these employees be left with the feeling that 1.) Big brother is watching over them 2.) that they can't be trusted to do their job. To monitor the computer and phone of an average employee who just does data entry or whatever is intrusive and shows that you don't trust this employee. If you don't respect the employee enough to respect them and believe they will be doing their job, then they will leave. What good would that do the company then? Not to mention, that if an employee truly wanted to slack off at work and expect to get paid for it, they would do it still around the censorship the company imposes. Most companies filter their internet so as to keep their employees from playing games, or surfing the internet, chatting, basically doing anything counterproductive. Now, if you censor these things, one the slacker who knows he is a slacker will get around the censorship. Two it just shows your employees you don't trust them to do their job. My opinion is, let the employee be able to play a game of solitaire during their breaks, or when they need a moment away from focusing on the task at hand. I usually find when I take a moment of pleasure in something like backgammon, I return to my work refreshed and with a new perspective, thus more productive than I would be if I just worked without a break.
So, to sum up as I can really go on about this topic and I'm sure you don't want to read my blog all night: really, where is monitoring a person's life worthy of the consequences? Where do we draw the line? Should we restrict any and all forms of media and pleasure for the employee just to make sure they are productive? I say a little monitoring is just, occassional cameras to make sure the right people are in the building. Maybe monitor the cars to make sure they are being used for work(that i get), monitor the company email, but leave the internet, phones, pagers alone! Unless the employee handles confidential material or its relevant to the company (ie. monitoring phones for a customer service dept.) there is no reason to display the lack of trust you have in the employee. If you think your employee is going to be a slacker, don't hire them. Plain and simple. Trust your employees and make them happy, and as result, they will do their best to make the company prosper.
But this is just my opinion, please feel free if you have other opinions, I'd love to hear from someone who agrees with Surveillance....