5 ms·

The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
For those who prefer text, the original report the podcast is based on was pretty interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/worker-productivity-tracking.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/work... or https://archive.ph/Bejv1 https://archive.ph/Bejv1
kornhole 4y ago
Interesting how some workers know and like the monitoring tools on themselves. Many of the debates on HN and elsewhere around this technology are split between psychologies. Many hate to be watched and controlled while others want the opposite. Being on one side of the spectrum, I was long puzzled at the other side's position until I came to accept it. I still try to understand how people have come to their position. The lyrics come to my mind, "Some of them want to abuse you. Some of them want to be used by you."
- EastSmith 4y ago
  I am not sure I've ever heard someone being happy for being monitored at work.
  - ShamelessC 4y ago
    It’s a long episode, but it is in fact mentioned in a lengthy segment near the end that some workers interviewed liked the accountability and focus the monitoring provided. Perhaps not the wisest opinion, but so it goes.
  - sebdufbeau 4y ago
    In the episode, you here about people who like the monitoring as it "levels the playing field" and reduces the perceived performance (eg: slackers that get promoted), leaving only the concrete performance as monitored by such tools I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that position personally, just exposing it
    - etempleton 4y ago
      My problem with this line of thinking is it creates a perverse desired outcome. Hours Worked at Computer > Productivity Not everyone is going to take the same amount of time to do the same amount of work. Not everyone’s work is of the same nature. If an employee goes for a walk and is thinking through a work problem the whole time was that not an effective use of time? I heard from a friend during the pandemic that they were having problems with a couple of employees and were considering this type of software. My response was why do you need the software, you know they are not getting the job done. Have a conversation with them and warn them about their performance and then if it doesn’t improve their future employment has to be considered. I don’t see why this is hard.
  - noarchy 4y ago
    Yeah I suspect it isn't exactly a 50/50 split between "both sides" of this issue - not that the article necessarily argued that, of course.
- 1123581321 4y ago
  What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.
  - Barrin92 4y ago
    if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's universal it's a good way to make compensation more meritocratic. Catching slackers isn't a bad thing, Only doing it in one direction is.
    - 1123581321 4y ago
      Makes sense--thank you.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      These kinds of things rarely include the people in charge—maybe middle-managers, sometimes, but not the actual big shots. See also: - Open office plans, except the bosses get offices (there are exceptions, as with any of these other points, but that's the norm) - Drug testing. - Anti-moonlighting rules or other onerous contractural restrictions or claims on time off (these kinds of things apply to higher-ups more often than the other two, but it's still common for them to be universal for the "peons" while the C-suite is allowed to have their hands in several pies at once) In general, being less-surveilled and less-restricted at work (and off work) is a perk of higher-status positions in a company. It's a social class thing, essentially. This tendency predates computerized surveillance.
    - pixelfarmer 4y ago
      "objective data to judge performance by" ... thanks for the laugh!
  - clpm4j 4y ago
    I listened to the podcast episode yesterday. Apparently some (I think they only cited one person as a source) people use it as a form of motivation and focus. They also said some women view it as a type of equalizer. But the ultimate takeaway was that the systems and the data are inherently not very accurate in their measurements.
bwestergard 4y ago
Glad I'm a union software developer and don't need to worry about this. https://twitter.com/WeBuildNPR/status/1484190346217148418 https://twitter.com/WeBuildNPR/status/1484190346217148418
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
JohnFen 4y ago
I genuinely cannot imagine any job worth being constantly spied on.
mise_en_place 4y ago
With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.
- commandlinefan 4y ago
  That was my first thought - I hate this, but I understand why they're doing it.
- ghaff 4y ago
  It's a small minority of course. But you'll even get people here vehemently arguing that essentially all is fair in love and war and screw companies anyway. So you get subreddits and news stories--which probably make it perceived as a far bigger problem than it actually is--which leads at least some companies to take action. As you suggest, you have selfish pricks ruining things for everyone. To be clear, a small moonlighting gig that's in keeping with business rules is fine. A second full-time job is almost certainly not.
  - jrjarrett 4y ago
    Why not?
    - ghaff 4y ago
      Because of what the parent said. They're probably making life harder for their coworkers even over and above encouraging companies to put these monitoring systems in place. (Assuming, of course, that multiple jobs is not considered perfectly legit as part of employment contracts/business ethics.) And, just to go all-in, if I had a co-worker doing this and I knew it wasn't allowed, I'd probably rat them out. In fact, I expect it's entirely possible I'd be in breach of some ethics guidelines if I didn't.
      - Bakary 4y ago
givemeethekeys 4y ago
Why bother working with a company that doesn't trust you?
- thebeastie 4y ago
  Might need the money…
etempleton 4y ago
My hard line is I won’t work for any company that enables the ability for the company to to turn on a web cam or microphone in my home. Web tracking software, key loggers, and automated screenshots is is the norm, unfortunately. I have a personal computer right there if I don’t want to be tracked, so that doesn’t matter to me. If you feel like you need these monitoring tools as a leader or manager perhaps take a long hard look in the mirror in regards to your own management abilities. I know what employees are doing their job and doing it well by the timeliness and quality of their deliverables and the amount of imitative they are taking. If an employee is not meeting expectations have a conversation with that employee and figure out why. The only thing monitoring software does is make everyone feel disrespected.

For those who prefer text, the original report the podcast is based on was pretty interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/worker-productivity-tracking.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/work... or https://archive.ph/Bejv1 https://archive.ph/Bejv1

kornhole 4y ago

Interesting how some workers know and like the monitoring tools on themselves. Many of the debates on HN and elsewhere around this technology are split between psychologies. Many hate to be watched and controlled while others want the opposite. Being on one side of the spectrum, I was long puzzled at the other side's position until I came to accept it. I still try to understand how people have come to their position. The lyrics come to my mind, "Some of them want to abuse you. Some of them want to be used by you."

EastSmith 4y ago
I am not sure I've ever heard someone being happy for being monitored at work.
- ShamelessC 4y ago
  It’s a long episode, but it is in fact mentioned in a lengthy segment near the end that some workers interviewed liked the accountability and focus the monitoring provided. Perhaps not the wisest opinion, but so it goes.
- sebdufbeau 4y ago
  In the episode, you here about people who like the monitoring as it "levels the playing field" and reduces the perceived performance (eg: slackers that get promoted), leaving only the concrete performance as monitored by such tools I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with that position personally, just exposing it
  - etempleton 4y ago
    My problem with this line of thinking is it creates a perverse desired outcome. Hours Worked at Computer > Productivity Not everyone is going to take the same amount of time to do the same amount of work. Not everyone’s work is of the same nature. If an employee goes for a walk and is thinking through a work problem the whole time was that not an effective use of time? I heard from a friend during the pandemic that they were having problems with a couple of employees and were considering this type of software. My response was why do you need the software, you know they are not getting the job done. Have a conversation with them and warn them about their performance and then if it doesn’t improve their future employment has to be considered. I don’t see why this is hard.
- noarchy 4y ago
  Yeah I suspect it isn't exactly a 50/50 split between "both sides" of this issue - not that the article necessarily argued that, of course.
1123581321 4y ago
What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's universal it's a good way to make compensation more meritocratic. Catching slackers isn't a bad thing, Only doing it in one direction is.
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    Makes sense--thank you.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    These kinds of things rarely include the people in charge—maybe middle-managers, sometimes, but not the actual big shots. See also: - Open office plans, except the bosses get offices (there are exceptions, as with any of these other points, but that's the norm) - Drug testing. - Anti-moonlighting rules or other onerous contractural restrictions or claims on time off (these kinds of things apply to higher-ups more often than the other two, but it's still common for them to be universal for the "peons" while the C-suite is allowed to have their hands in several pies at once) In general, being less-surveilled and less-restricted at work (and off work) is a perk of higher-status positions in a company. It's a social class thing, essentially. This tendency predates computerized surveillance.
  - pixelfarmer 4y ago
    "objective data to judge performance by" ... thanks for the laugh!
- clpm4j 4y ago
  I listened to the podcast episode yesterday. Apparently some (I think they only cited one person as a source) people use it as a form of motivation and focus. They also said some women view it as a type of equalizer. But the ultimate takeaway was that the systems and the data are inherently not very accurate in their measurements.

bwestergard 4y ago

Glad I'm a union software developer and don't need to worry about this. https://twitter.com/WeBuildNPR/status/1484190346217148418 https://twitter.com/WeBuildNPR/status/1484190346217148418

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

JohnFen 4y ago

I genuinely cannot imagine any job worth being constantly spied on.

mise_en_place 4y ago

With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.

commandlinefan 4y ago
That was my first thought - I hate this, but I understand why they're doing it.
ghaff 4y ago
It's a small minority of course. But you'll even get people here vehemently arguing that essentially all is fair in love and war and screw companies anyway. So you get subreddits and news stories--which probably make it perceived as a far bigger problem than it actually is--which leads at least some companies to take action. As you suggest, you have selfish pricks ruining things for everyone. To be clear, a small moonlighting gig that's in keeping with business rules is fine. A second full-time job is almost certainly not.
- jrjarrett 4y ago
  Why not?
  - ghaff 4y ago
    Because of what the parent said. They're probably making life harder for their coworkers even over and above encouraging companies to put these monitoring systems in place. (Assuming, of course, that multiple jobs is not considered perfectly legit as part of employment contracts/business ethics.) And, just to go all-in, if I had a co-worker doing this and I knew it wasn't allowed, I'd probably rat them out. In fact, I expect it's entirely possible I'd be in breach of some ethics guidelines if I didn't.
    - Bakary 4y ago

givemeethekeys 4y ago

Why bother working with a company that doesn't trust you?

thebeastie 4y ago
Might need the money…

etempleton 4y ago

My hard line is I won’t work for any company that enables the ability for the company to to turn on a web cam or microphone in my home. Web tracking software, key loggers, and automated screenshots is is the norm, unfortunately. I have a personal computer right there if I don’t want to be tracked, so that doesn’t matter to me. If you feel like you need these monitoring tools as a leader or manager perhaps take a long hard look in the mirror in regards to your own management abilities. I know what employees are doing their job and doing it well by the timeliness and quality of their deliverables and the amount of imitative they are taking. If an employee is not meeting expectations have a conversation with that employee and figure out why. The only thing monitoring software does is make everyone feel disrespected.