A majority of states have enacted off-the-job privacy protection laws. What is the LEAST effective argument by an employer to regulate off-the-clock activities in a state that has not enacted such lifestyle rights legislation?
A) It will provide a healthy work force.
B) Unregulated employees are less productive.
C) There is no invasion of privacy since the employee is "at will."
D) It will prevent higher health care and insurance costs.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The argument that there is no invasion of privacy since the employee is "at will" is the least effective because it shows a lack of understanding of the legal concept of at-will employment, which refers to the ability of employers to terminate employees at any time, for any reason, as long as it is not illegal. It does not mean that employers have the right to control employees' off-the-clock activities. Furthermore, even in at-will employment states, employees still have a reasonable expectation of privacy in certain aspects of their personal lives.

Answer: A and D 
 The arguments that regulating off-the-clock activities will provide a healthy workforce and prevent higher health care and insurance costs are more effective because they relate to the employer's legitimate business interests. Employers may have a strong interest in promoting healthy behaviors among their employees, as healthier workers are generally more productive and less likely to miss work due to illness. Similarly, preventing higher health care and insurance costs is an important goal for many employers, and they may reasonably believe that regulating employee behavior outside of work can help achieve this goal. However, it is worth noting that these arguments may be subject to legal challenges if they are overly intrusive or discriminate against certain groups of employees.

A Majority of States Have Enacted Off-The-Job Privacy Protection Laws