Abstract:
Employers seeking &ndash\; and being able to &ndash\; control employee behavior outside of working hours is nothing new. \; Pre-employment and on-going drug tests have been common since the 1980s\, for example\, and in earlier days\, employers such as Henry Ford sought to control many aspects of their employees&rsquo\; lives. \; However\, several recent developments have extended efforts to control employee behavior into new areas\, and with new significance. \; Employers have imposed not just requirements against using illegal drugs\, but have imposed &ldquo\;no smoking&rdquo\; requirements even outside of working hours. \; Employees have been fired for engaging in political speech outside of the workplace\, and for posting pictures of themselves engaged in otherwise unremarkable acts such as drinking at a Halloween party on social media sites. \; Mandates to improve diet\, Body Mass Index (&ldquo\;BMI&rdquo\;) and other aspects of employee health and nutrition suggest an ability to control employees&rsquo\; eating and exercise habits. \; And\, employers monitor social media accounts for any potentially &ldquo\;embarrassing&rdquo\; posts\, even when they are not connected to the workplace or identified with it. \; In this paper\, I will argue that there are ethical limits on the controls that employers may put on their employees&rsquo\; out of work behavior\, and that many\, although not necessarily all\, \; of these limits should be enshrined into legal protections which would prevent employers from conditioning employment on the regulations criticized. \;