Imagine you are going about your usual workday. You might be responding to some emails, drafting a document, examining some data. And all the while you are being monitored with screenshots, keypad strokes and even GPS tracking. Does this make you feel uncomfortable?
If it does, you are not alone. NY Times reporter, Adam Satariano, tried this experiment with his own boss when he allowed his editor to track his every movement through surveillance software Hubstaff. At the end of each day, she would get a report on the number of hours he worked, the productivity score, and the websites and apps he was using. At the end of the 3 week experiment, this is what he had to say:
Even though this was just an experiment, it didn’t make it any less embarrassing and intrusive. And it goes beyond being caught exercising in the middle of the day. What if other screenshots exposed sensitive health or financial information?
I trust Pui-Wing, but the monitoring systems have few safeguards to prevent abuse, and they rely on managers exercising judgment and restraint.
His editor didn’t particularly enjoy the level of intrusion either, admitting it was “yucky to see so much of someone’s information”. Regardless, with so many different types of monitoring software out there, employers are showing an interest - a recent study revealed that demand for employee surveillance software was up 55% in June 2020 compared to the pre-pandemic average.
So what does this all mean for remote working and future surveillance?
My first guest, Lewis Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute and former director of employment rights at the ACLU has seen dozens of employee privacy violations throughout his career. In the first part of this episode, we discuss the state of employee surveillance in the US, power dynamics, and transparency.
Highlights
Lewis on surveillance technology trade-offs
There’s a very strong relationship between high intrusive levels of surveillance and medical stress. It’s been clear for years that any financial benefit employers get from this sort of level of monitoring is not worth it because its costing them 10 times as much in higher medical bills for their employees. But it doesn’t seem to matter.
In the second part, I speak with David Tomczak, I-O psychology doctoral candidate at The George Washington University. He tells me that the way workplace technologies are applied in the workplace is an organisational decision - and depending on the context and the type of job - technology can be used for good.
David on mindful application of surveillance technology
What we need to understand is that monitoring is basically in all jobs now. It’s unavoidable and we need to focus on the implementation aspects of it so that these sorts of problems with privacy invasion and power differentials are not a problem. When we use these tools to help the employee rather than to find opportunities to potentially ruin their careers or ruin their job prospects. That’s an organisational decision.
Recommended reads
You can find more podcast episodes on Apple podcasts, Spotify, and other platforms. If you would like to facilitate a discussion or even send some feedback, you can email me at: theofficereset@gmail.com
Share this post