You accept a position as the Corporate Security Director for ACME Electronics, a companythat manufactures different devices for a variety of well-known brands, including cell phones, cameras, camcorders, stereos, computers, tablets, video games, and more. At any given time, many of these products are fully assembled and stored at the plant awaiting shipment to the vendors. Also stored at the plant are the expensive components used to manufacture the devices.
During the first week of your new employment, you learn that significant device and component inventory shortages have occurred over the past year resulting in substantial company losses. You suspect widespread internal employee theft and have begun considering the various physical, procedural, virtual, and other security control options available to address the theft issue. One of the security controls you contemplate employing is an administrative search procedure, which is often referred to as a package control program. From your discussions with colleagues in the security profession, you know that some employers have instituted administrative, non-coercive, care taking search programs that have very effectively mitigated internal theft losses. You believe that such a program would achieve similar results for ACME Electronics if properly implemented at the ACME facility.
You meet with corporate attorneys to discuss the feasibility of initiating an ACME Electronics administrative search program because you know these programs are controversial and sometimes result in significant legal issues with considerable potential for civil lawsuits filed against the company and its security operatives. After a brief introductory discussion with the attorneys, the corporationâ€™s Chief Counsel provides you with a case study dealing with the implementation of a new package control system at Bellevue Hospital Center in New York City and asks that you become completely familiar with the legal issues presented in the court case; the legal positions the plaintiff and the defendant advanced to the court; and the courtâ€™s ruling and rationale, including the important features of the search procedure instituted by the hospital. The Chief Counsel also asks that before any further corporate group discussions take place regarding the implementation of an administrative search program at ACME Electronics, you evaluate how this court decision might impact your facilityâ€™s security operations and how the results of this court decision would be used in any administrative search policy proposals you make to the corporate executives.
Writing Assignment: After reading and evaluating Judge Edward Weinfeldâ€™s opinion in Chenkin v. BELLEVUE HOSP. CTR., NYC, ETC., 479 F. Supp. 207 (S.D.N.Y. 1979), linked below, consider the case in its entirety, particularly the courtâ€™s opinion, and respond to the following:
(1) Write a strong introduction, first stating the purpose of the paper, then providing a succinct recitation of the significant facts in this case.
(2) Describe the issues related to the search program the court needed to resolve.
(3) Explain the positions that Chenkin and Bellevue advanced to the court regarding Chenkinâ€™s claim that the hospitalâ€™s package control system was unconstitutional.
(4) Provide details of the courtâ€™s ruling and rationale and describe the important features of the Bellevue search procedure cited by the court in rejecting Chenkinâ€™s claims.
Based on your understanding of the Chenkin v. Bellevue Hospital court case, in addition to the independent research you complete using at least two additional sources, respond to the following in preparation for your follow-up discussions with the Chief Counsel about the implementation of an administrative search program at the ACME Electronics facility:
(5) As a practical matter, evaluate how this court decision might impact security operations. Be specific and comprehensive.
(6) Explain how the results of this case would be used in any policy proposals you make to the corporate executives.
Court Case Link: