The Boss Is Remotely Monitoring Blue-Collar Workers 228
McGruber writes "The Wall Street Journal reports on the new level of surveillance available to bosses of blue collar workers. Thanks to mobile devices and inexpensive monitoring software, managers can now know where workers are, eavesdrop on their phone calls, tell if a truck driver is wearing his seat belt and intervene if he is tailgating. 'Twenty-five years ago this was pipe dream stuff,' said Paul Sangster, CEO of JouBeh Technologies, a Canadian company that develops tracking, or 'telematics,' technology for businesses. 'Now it is commonly accepted that you are being tracked.' In the U.S., workplace tracking technology is largely unregulated, and courts have found that employees have few rights to privacy on the job. No federal statutes restrict the use of GPS by employers, nor force them to disclose whether they are using it. Only two states, Delaware and Connecticut, require employers to tell workers that their electronic communications — anything from emails to instant messages to texts — are being monitored."
The logical end of all this .... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
UPS (Score:5, Interesting)
We use software purchased from UPS to track our drivers. Their company cell phone has the UPS app, which relays data back to the server (including GPS). Of course, being on a phone and not built into the vehicle, it's dependent on the driver taking the phone with him or leaving it in the truck. However, it still managed to catch a driver "borrowing" the truck in the middle of the night to visit his girlfriend on the other side of the city, and then returning it a few hours later. He was let go the following day. The funny part is that he was one of the drivers who would always forget to take the phone or keep it charged.
Re:Well yeah (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean it's not your truck, it's your boss'. It's not your computer and desk, it belongs to your boss. Etc etc.
It's the companies laptop. In your home.
It's the company's truck. After hours.
It's the company's phone. On a private call.
Misuse of this technology can and will affect employee morale rather sharply.
Right. Because nobody who's morale dropped enough to complain was disciplined. Anywhere. Ever.
I'm sorry, but this is a classic example of where government regulation is needed. Companies have the privilege (not right!) of monitoring their employees. Just like your driver's license isn't a right to drive: It can be revoked. Employers need to be held accountable for overstepping boundaries of reasonableness.
Go ahead and record e-mails, but if it doesn't directly affect the business it should be deleted and no further comment made. Direct managers should be prevented from monitoring their employees electronically -- instead a separate department such as HR should do this, so as to prevent bias. Phone calls should not be monitored once the employee is off the clock. If they have a problem with this, remotely disable the phone at the appointed time. Same with computers with internet access, and other dual-use devices. Keep in mind many people use their personal phone for work-related calls, and likewise with laptops and other electronic devices. Remote evesdropping when you are not actively engaged in company business should be prohibited.
And to seal the deal, we need federal legislation to drop the ban-hammer on so-called "right to work" state legislation; The laws should be written so only conduct which directly impacts the company, while using company resources, can be subject to disciplinary action. In other words, if you don't like JP Morgan's shady business strategies (which led to the subprime mortgage crisis), you should be free to protest on your own time without fear of reprisal.
We need to draw a line that says only conduct that happens on company time or using company resources is subject to any disciplinary action. We need to prohibit employers from taking action against employers punitively on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identification, etc. And this is not just about protecting "the little guy"; This is about protecting the country as a whole.
Merit-based employment and strong non-discrimination policies provide a direct and immediate benefit to society by making as many jobs available to as many qualified candidates as possible. It increases labor supply, and rewards companies who hire on the basis of merit with a more competitive and efficient labor force.
Pervasive electronic monitoring is a strike against that goal. I will tell you, being on the other side of the IT version of the 'one-way' glass, that if you watch anyone long enough, you'll find a reason to hate them. You will become judgmental, and you will look at them differently. Which is precisely why managers should never under any circumstances be allowed to covertly monitor their employees. There is no "if" about morale suffering; It starts deteriorating the moment you start.
And managers are notoriously short-sighted, poor judges of character, and often blow things radically out of proportion when they do come across something hinky. Just like the general public did during the hunt for the boston bomber. People who are not trained and experienced in surveillance, who are not impartial to the people being watched, should never, ever, ever be given the reins. Disaster is most often the result.
Re:Protip (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, yes we can all look at the obvious examples. Well done.
What happens when you are on call? can the employer follow you all the time? how about unpaid lunch break?
What happens when a boss doesn't like the movie you went to see? or the church you go to?
What about politicians? (Score:4, Interesting)
Since we pay their salary it should be our right to monitor what they are doing during work. Included reading their mails, and listen to their phone conversations and tracking their physical location via GPS.
Re:Protip (Score:4, Interesting)
What happens when a boss doesn't like the movie you went to see? or the church you go to?
Well, my movie attendance isn't something federally protected, so, they can fire me if they don't like my taste in movies -- unless you're in some silly state where we can't choose who we hire and fire. Drink a Coke? Sorry, we prefer Pepsi drinkers here. Here's your last check.
My church attendance, on the other hand, is one of those things already federally protected.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 [wikipedia.org]
Re:Well yeah (Score:5, Interesting)
Even without explicit "right-to-work" laws, that's already the case in any state that has at-will employment, which is a separate issue. As for reading the law, yes, I did actually read the law that as proposed for my state, which was just one of several dozen proposals over the last decade. It had no provision effecting at-will employment.
I'll also argue that enacting right-to-work laws is a major step along the way to merit-based employment, rather than basing job placement on who's been feeding the union coffers the longest.
Re:Protip (Score:4, Interesting)
Playing devil's advocate here...
The toilet at your job is provided by the company, yet they aren't allowed to film you in there.
Some things are off limits, regardless of who provides them.
Re:Protip (Score:4, Interesting)
They same way you do now.
Meaning that you practically can't, unless the employer was extremely careless and stupid.
Tracking doesn't change this.
If your employer doesn't like you, they figure out how to fire you.
Tracking gives them a tool to profile you.
Without such tracking they would have to either stalk you (criminal) or ask you (see careless/stupid above).
If firing you for a particular reason is illegal, the employer has no right to that information.