It is probably not uncommon for bosses to fly into a rage at their subordinates, berating them at meetings in front of other employees. Employees may even be threatened with the loss of their jobs for such failures as:
(a) Not agreeing to fudge financial statements;
(b) Refusing sexual advances;
(c) Not trying to get out of jury duty; or
(d) Refusing to commit perjury on behalf of a union or company.
Such instances involve a clear violation of privacy. It is certainly necessary to let an employee know that he is not performing satisfactorily. However, that is not something other employees or managers, who are not in the person direct line of supervision or who will not likely ever supervise that person, have a right to know.
Everyone is entitled to his good public reputation. Finally, using threats to try to force employees to violate the law is a kind of invasion of privacy. It intrudes into the person real of conscience and puts him in legal jeopardy.
For the natural-law or any rights-based moralist, these instances are evidence of employee abuse, of violations of human dignity and respect for persons and, therefore, immoral. It is unlikely that a utilitarian moralist would ever argue that these practices are morally justified and would produce good results on the whole. As for cultural relativism, it is unlikely that societal mores anywhere in the United States would accept this kind of treatment at the workplace.
