Constant Observation: Workplace Surveillance (Final Version)

-- By DahwitBerhanu - 29 Nov 2024

Introduction

Learning about the varied and extensive ways in which human behavior is surveilled and collected naturally leads to some uneasy feelings. From monitoring being performed by third party platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok? , to surveillance being conducted by the manufacturers of device hardware such as Apple, it is evident that surveillance of the individual is quite pervasive. Though such aforementioned modes of surveillance are primarily oriented towards collecting data and information on the individual, I began to wonder whether surveillance extended into the professional realm — i.e., the workplace. That is, what are the ways in which employers make use of surveillance to monitor their employees? Further, how can employees combat such surveillance and regain control and autonomy of their professional lives? As virtually everyone works a job in order to sustain their livelihood, understanding how employers are monitoring us and how to protect against it is especially important.

Scope of Surveillance

Just like the constantly continuous surveillance and tracking taking place at any given moment on our beloved smartphones, the workplace is no different. In the corporate environment, programs exist which capture the keystrokes of employees, monitor emails and phone calls, and collect facial expressions and tone of voice in order to measure employees’ affect and attitude. Illustrative of this point, is a contract attorney who was terminated as a consequence of such software showing that the attorney was not as productive/focused as others when reviewing documents. Further, employers sometimes require employees to install programs on their personal devices, many of which enable continuous access to location services, monitoring device usage, and other personal device data such as website activity. Obviously, the installation of workplace surveillance onto the personal devices of employees blurs the distinction between the workplace and the home, consequently inviting employers’ surveillance mechanisms into the homes of its employees.

What’s more, such surveillance and monitoring is not just limited to the corporate environment. In fact, in blue collar and warehouse environments, the surveillance practices of employers are no better. They are remarkably awful and dehumanizing. For the purposes of this, discussing the surveillance and monitoring which is being conducted by Amazon in its warehouses sheds the most light. In a piece on workplace surveillance, Data & Society followed the day of an Amazon warehouse employee. The use of badges to not only enter the building but as one goes about the facility constantly track the whereabouts of any given employee. Moreover, once at their respective workstation, a monitor informs the employee of how fast they are working, thereby providing a real-time check of whether an employee is meeting the productivity rate required. Supervisors have access to the productivity rates of employees enabling them to reprimand employees in real-time should they fall short of expectations. Any time an employee steps away from their respective workstation, even that is monitored with such information being used by supervisors to discipline or fire employees for not being productive enough.

Consequences and Implications

It is crucial to remark that such surveillance should not be normalized. In fact, such surveillance is reprehensible and a breach of acceptable standards of privacy. In the warehouse environment, strict adherence to productivity standards has led to numerous injuries to employees as they struggle to keep up with high efficiency rates. In the corporate office, surveillance breeds an atmosphere of insecurity, anxiety, and distrust. Clearly then, in addition to the inherent issues with surveillance, the fact that employees are encountering real life physical and psychological harm further provides the impetus to combat workplace surveillance. One such recent example of workers combating workplace surveillance is the union representing UPS workers successfully bargaining for the prohibition of firings based on data collected by surveillance monitoring systems. However, this is by no means an ‘ideal’ outcome as such concessions should not have to be bargained for in the first place. Had surveillance not entered the equation this would never have been an issue. Even more troubling than the fact that employers can and do observe the every move of their employees is the issue of the immense data profile such surveillance generates. This means that well after an employee leaves a company, their data is likely still being exploited and used by the company. Unsurprisingly then, it comes as no surprise that employers have become one of the largest collectors of personal data.

Fighting Back

With methods of surveillance being pervasive in the workforce, the question then becomes how can new and existing employees protect themselves and others from insidious managerial monitoring. Naturally, many would think that laws need to be changed to better protect the rights of employees. Though this is certainly true, the problem with this approach is that such surveillance technologies often develop much faster than regulatory agencies can keep up with. Accordingly, it seems that with some caveats, unions present themselves to be a formidable tool for employees to combat workplace surveillance. The unionization in the UPS example enabled workers to prevent termination of the basis of surveillanced behavior. Moreover, in Australia, the Rail, Tram, and Bus Union successfully fought against the national proposal to mandate recording in public transport. However, the use of unions must be taken with caution as the very modes of surveillance used by employers enables them to infiltrate union conversations and discussions. In fact, workplace surveillance technologies have enabled employers to peer inside the places where such conversations are taking place — for example, social media and private email listservs. Amazon managers, for instance, were caught infiltrating a listserv where unionization discussions were taking place. Moreover, unionization and collective bargaining is not just limited to the manufacturing industry. In fact, even law firms have begun to recognize unions formed by its associates. Unionization, therefore, presents itself as a critical tool for employees seeking to curb surveillance as laws slowly catch up to protect workers’ rights. As employers are unlikely to voluntarily cease surveillance, the burden is undoubtedly on us as employees to fight for stronger workplace protections and rights.