Experts are warning about the increasing ways employers are monitoring employees, citing technological advancements that allow for extensive data collection and productivity tracking, even within employees' homes. These practices, widely adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic, have raised significant privacy concerns.
Wilneida Negrón, director of research and policy at Coworker, stated that recent developments in monitoring technology, particularly artificial intelligence, have led to employers constructing detailed data profiles, or 'dossiers,' on their employees. Negrón suggested these profiles can be used to predict worker behavior or even for punitive measures, noting that workers with less power in the labor market are often subjected to the most intrusive data collection methods.
A variety of digital tools are currently employed to track employee locations, assess task completion rates, and access cameras on work-issued devices. This has led to questions about the extent of privacy employees have ceded. An investigation by Vanderbilt University, Northeastern University, and the University of California at Berkeley found that many common workplace monitoring programs share personal data, including names and email addresses, with hundreds of external data brokers and technology companies without explicit disclosure.
One former pharmacist, Lannie Duong, described how her employer monitored the duration of her phone calls and patient appointments, scrutinizing her for taking longer with patients. Duong felt that the relentless pressure and lack of trust contributed to her feeling hopeless and depressed, eventually leading her to take medical leave and subsequently have her employment terminated. She has since become involved in organizing a union.
While some employers use surveillance tools transparently and involve employee boards in their review, Negrón noted that others engage in non-transparent tracking, ranking, and scoring of employees. She emphasized the need for workers to unite, stating that the consolidation of tracking and monitoring capabilities is advancing too rapidly.
Hayley Tsukayama, director of state affairs at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, highlighted that employees should anticipate monitoring if using company-issued devices. She advises researching data collection and surveillance trends within one's industry to be prepared for potential discoveries. Tsukayama also mentioned that some states, including New York, Connecticut, Delaware, and Maine, mandate employers to inform workers about monitoring activities. Maine's law further restricts visual monitoring in employees' homes or personal vehicles unless directly related to job duties.
For employees in states without notification requirements, uncovering employer surveillance can be challenging. Tsukayama suggests that coordinating with a union is an effective way to address these issues with management. If approaching managers individually, she recommends a cautious, inquisitive tone, asking about the use and external sharing of collected data. Aiha Nguyen, director of the Labor Futures Initiative at Data & Society, suggests inquiring about the specific employee data collected, with the IT department potentially having more detailed information.
Common software like Microsoft Office and Zoom possess tracking capabilities that are not always activated. Nguyen pointed out that determining if these features are enabled can be difficult, as they are integrated into the programs and often presented as necessary for work. Experts advise against using work devices for sensitive personal matters, such as family issues or medical conditions, to safeguard personal information, though they acknowledge the inconvenience of switching between devices.