06-09-2011, 12:25 AM
No question.
Even if it's work related, unless *maybe* it's a work phone, it's unethical. I don't know about illegal as it criminal, but I bet in many states it could qualify for civil action. Not that it's where you necessarily want to go.
If it really bothers you, and/or if it were me (being violated, not being the violator) the company would reimburse me for changing my number, a pain though it be.
Cell number, home number, makes no difference-- absolutely unethical.
I would ask HR-- WTF?! If they have a good explanation (which is no excuse) a friendly explanation of ethics might suffice. If the explanation is stupid (meaning one you don't agree with) a Riot Act may be in order.
It's not at all uncommon to give HR more information as to how to be reached that fellow employees would not be privy to.
And if CJ were in some kind of directory, I doubt that HR would have even been involved. Not to mention CJ seems like a smart enough girl to realize that if her number were in a work directory, the expectation of privacy would be limited to non-existant.
And that doesn't mean that any employee *gets* to call that number (from a work directory) for non-work related reasons. It just means that HR would likely be off the hook, ethically and legally.
From what the first post said, three words-- absolutely frikkin' unethical.
Even if it's work related, unless *maybe* it's a work phone, it's unethical. I don't know about illegal as it criminal, but I bet in many states it could qualify for civil action. Not that it's where you necessarily want to go.
If it really bothers you, and/or if it were me (being violated, not being the violator) the company would reimburse me for changing my number, a pain though it be.
Cell number, home number, makes no difference-- absolutely unethical.
I would ask HR-- WTF?! If they have a good explanation (which is no excuse) a friendly explanation of ethics might suffice. If the explanation is stupid (meaning one you don't agree with) a Riot Act may be in order.
It's not at all uncommon to give HR more information as to how to be reached that fellow employees would not be privy to.
And if CJ were in some kind of directory, I doubt that HR would have even been involved. Not to mention CJ seems like a smart enough girl to realize that if her number were in a work directory, the expectation of privacy would be limited to non-existant.
And that doesn't mean that any employee *gets* to call that number (from a work directory) for non-work related reasons. It just means that HR would likely be off the hook, ethically and legally.
From what the first post said, three words-- absolutely frikkin' unethical.