Biometrics in the Workplace 554
ryth writes "The Globe and Mail reports that McDonald's Restaurants and a few other companies in Canada have introduced palm-scanning technologies for employees. Workers are now expected to 'sign' in and out using their palm prints to record the exact time of arrival and the identity of the employee. Quoted in the article Jorn Nordmann, president of S.M. Products, was blunt about why he installed a hand scanner at his fish-processing plant in Delta, B.C. 'If you want to control a whole bunch of people, it's the only way to go.' It seems that some of the most underpaid and undervalued workers are starting to be treated no better than the animals they are frying up." Except for the frying part.
Swipe Card (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:4, Insightful)
Paying for employees time when they are not there is a waste of money too.
The point is more about forcing the employees to be responcible and accountable. Just about everywhere I worked cared more about your atendance and puncuality than they did about any other aspect of our with. Its not like is any different that using punch cards other than the employees can't cheat the system.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect that most opposition to this is merely knee-jerk reaction to biometrics.
That isn't to say that there aren't issues with the use of biometrics in all situations. The key is whether or not the use of the biometrics coincieds with a legitimate need to establish identity, and whether or not it exposes the user to additional risks or invasion of privacy.
Street corner cameras, for example, which purport to scan for wanted crimials, are an outrage. The government has no legitimate interest in establishing my identity merely because I stand on a street corner. It is recording information about me and my location which I have not authorized, and which I may not, for a variety of legitimate reasons, want known. It opens me up to the risk of being falsely detained in the event of a false positive. There is simply no justification for it, and many reasons to oppose it.
Biometrics are not inherently bad, and they can be used legitimately. The fact that they can also be used indiscriminately and inappropriately is not justification to oppose their use in all circumstances.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:4, Interesting)
A street corner where you are outside on property that is maintained by the taxpayers is public. Your living room is private.
I am not saying you lose all rights to privacy when you go outside but to say it is "an outrage" for someone to take your picture when you go outside is absurd.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I agree!
Just because I go to work for someone doesn't mean they have the right to know where I am or what I'm doing. It's bad enough that I have to give them my address for them to mail my check to. Now they want to track me for 8 hours a day too?! Give them an inch and they'll take a mile every time! I bet this is more the work of that Ashcroft guy. I bet Howard Dean has heard some rumors about this. You just wait and see!
Re:Swipe Card (Score:3, Funny)
Goodness, yes. They might accidentally look at somebody.
I think someone completely rewrote the definition of "privacy" when we weren't looking.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:3, Insightful)
That really depends on your jurisdiction. In the US, that's what the 9th amendment is talking about. In other jurisdictions such as the European Union, privacy and personality rights are actually spelled out in respective constitutions and EU treaties.
Either way, whatever rights I have isn't limited to what the government "gives" me. The government doesn't give you any rights. It's the people giving the government the rights to conduct their business.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:2)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:2)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Swipe Card (Score:2, Interesting)
But you (probably) won't loose your hand (Score:4, Interesting)
However, just like with keys, and even more frequently, people forget their card. I have a cube near the door to our room and I'm ALWAYS getting up to let someone in that forgot their card. No big deal, since it's just door access. Someone else can let them in or they can borrow a card. Bigger deal if it is needed to clock in, means they have to go back home.
Personally, I'd really like to see biometrics more. It'd just hard to loose. For high security areas/things you need other authentication, of course (like a passocde and/or keycard) in addtion but for most things a simple print is good enough. I've lost my wallet, I've lost my keys, but I've never lost my hand.
Re:But you (probably) won't loose your hand (Score:3, Interesting)
If not a biometric device, there could be a real person sitting at every entrance to help eliminate this nonsense. Of course you'd have to pay them enough to en
It can be profitable (Score:5, Interesting)
The issue (Score:5, Interesting)
I am aware of a very large produce packing company in south Florida that installed a similar system several years ago for tracking employee hours for the mostly migrant pickers and packagers. Prior to this system it was not uncommon for a quarter of the staff to not show up for work at all yet, still collect a paycheck for a full week's work. The companies facilities are very low tech overall, due to the nature of their business so, it was very surprising to see such a high tech time clock there.
In this particular case they used a number of hand scanners that measured the geometry of the persons hand for biometric identification. The company also found that the process of clocking in and out was much faster with this system as it illiminated the search for the time card on the wall and the examination of the timecard after it was punched. With the hand scanner the worker simply placed their hand on the scanner and when the light turned green it meant that they had successfully been identified and they moved on. Instead of taking one or more minutes for an individual to clock in, it now takes less than 15 seconds. This adds up when you start talking about crews in the hundreds.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:5, Insightful)
The math is simple enought even for the dumbest of business people. He only needs to ask whether or not the money spent on this device is less than or greater than the money stolen from him.
I think the fact that he's willing to spend so much money on such a device suggests that the incidence of theft is much greater than you think.
I also want to say that it's disturbing that you take lightly dishonesty. Things like morality and ethics aren't just stupid games philosophers play. What people believe is right and wrong has a real, though indirect impact on society. It ultimately come back to you, although for most people it's difficult to see.
This very story is about some of those more obvious impacts. The owner can't trust his employees to do the right thing, so energy and resources must be wasted on this device -- energy and resources that could have gone elsewhere and put to more productive use. He's unhappy and the employees are unhappy.
Ultimately, a proper moral code tries to guide people to make good decisions that lead us generally away from such economically wasteful and socially unhappy situations a this. I don't think it's too far off to suggest that dishonesty and theft are not part of such a moral code.
Re:Swipe Card (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you sure? I've worked with people that used just that sort of logic. They think they're just being practical. They actually think it's a sign of weakness and naivete to consider such things as morality and ethics. If you bring it up, they just pat you on the head like you're a kid.
Control Central (Score:5, Funny)
Coming soon to a population center near you...
Soylent Green... (Score:2)
Re:Control Central (Score:2)
Better make sure... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Better make sure... (Score:2)
Re:Better make sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Better make sure... (Score:2)
Yeah, it would be a shame if a restaurant as widely applauded for its cleanliness and wonderfully high quality products served in a sanitary environment had its good name ruined because of this...
huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, I'm an employer and I think you're absolutely right. You can't trust people to do the right thing, so must treat them like children or animals.
They should have pay docked by the minute if they're late. Of course if they're a early that time doesn't count, and of course if at the en
Re:huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting. At my workplace, we don't use obscenely hyperbolic arguments to attempt to defend against completely reasonable points.
No kidding (Score:5, Insightful)
However time card have problems. They are easily damaged, since they are just paper. Also it is possible to get confused, and grab the wrong card, I did that on one occasion. However more important to an employer, another employee could punch a friend in, making it appear as if they were there.
This eliminates problems and just streamlines everything. You scan you plam, it knows you are you and clocks you in. Scan again to clock out. No confusion and no practical way to fake it.
This in no way limits your privacy your rights or anything else. You employer has a right to know when you are working for them. And guess what? If the system is lax, people will abuse it. Like now I work at a university and all hourly positions (which is only student positions really) simply fill out a timebook once a week, which is then signed by their supervisor. So what happens? You guessed it, people cheat. A student will show up to work 15 minutes late, take a long lunch, and slip out 30 minutes eairly yet still report a full work day.
It works the other way too. Makes it much harder for a company to screw you. Say you need to work late. They decide they don't want to pay you for that time to try to claim you weren't there. Hard for them to say if there is a palm scan record of you leaving. Much easier to say if there is no record, or just a punch card.
Re:No kidding (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you that naive? Palm scanning, or other high-tech "people control" equipment, is brought into a company to benefit the employer mainly and the employee hardly. It is done to keep salary costs low... which benefits the employer mainly.
Clock cards are all well and good. I used one when I was younger and working in a printing factory for a few months. However I sure would not have wanted my employer to have a scan of my hand... fingerprints or palmprints. Why? Well who is going to oversee the records and make sure that they are not handed out to anyone who wants a copy?
Companies have enough info on their staff already... might as well throw in a voiceprint too and the unscrupulous will have a ready made set of IDs.
"Makes it much harder for a company to screw you." is what you said... yet in the article Colin Bennett, a politics professor at the University of Victoria, was quoted as saying "The employees would have little recourse if their information was misused."
Don't try to find the silver lining in that cloud mate.
cheers
front
Re:No kidding (Score:3, Insightful)
exactly- prevents theft (Score:5, Insightful)
...especially since the #1 problem with timecards, according to a friend who manages a small manufacturing business, is that employees regularly clock each other in/out as favors.
So lets get this straight- it prevents theft and reduces peer pressure("Hey bob, clock me in early tomorrow, will ya? The kid needs new braces.") It involves absolutely nothing intrusive(I fail to see how storing the dimensions of your hand is intrusive) and is merely an improvement on a system that's been in use for almost a CENTURY.
What's the problem here? That biometrics are evil?
Re:huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
Bad/good management determines whether a time recording system works or doesn't, the technology just makes it harder to cheat. So now the honest guy who is late by 5 minutes doesn't get into trouble while the sneaky guy comes in half an hour late, saf
Metrics (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RFID (Score:2)
I know you're being sarcastic, but it's worth pointing out the real difference here.
RFID is a passive system. You are not in control of when you are tracked.
The palm scan is active. You get to pick when you're tracked. Of course, if you decide not to let yourself be tracked, you're not paid. As another poster said, it sure as hell beats the comparatively fragile timecard system.
Back in the day... (Score:2)
Wait a minute...that's Flintstones!
No big changes (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it so significant that a palm scanner is being used now? It prevents deception - it's unlikely you'll cut off a hand for your friend to clock you in early. Other than that, it means you can't lose your timecard (major accidents excepted). Oh, and you might want to wash your hands more...
Re:No big changes (Score:2)
Re:No big changes (Score:2)
Re:No big changes (Score:2)
I work for a major defense contractor, and we've had a badge-in/badge-out system for years now. Every morning you gotta put your badge up to a scanner, the computer checks your badge ID, logs the time, and the turnstile lets you in. Of course, I usually pray that something goes wrong and it doesn't let me in so that I can go home and take a nap, but so far that hasn't
Re:No big changes (Score:2)
how does that work. as extremities, the temperature of y0ur hands varies wildly depending on conditions. if you've walked into work on a cold winters day without gloves on then yours hands will be very cold, colder than a hand that had been cut off and left in a luke warm office for a while (and less smelly too).
and I would hope it would work off more than just heat anywas, that can be faked. perhaps it might record the pattern of heat which would be much harder
dave
Re:No big changes (Score:2)
Re:No big changes (Score:5, Insightful)
Prove to us that you are a man of principle: Show us your years of uncashed paychecks. Don't let The Man take advantage of you anymore!
Re:No big changes (Score:4, Funny)
You're joking, but I had a co-worker who really did this. He didn't cash any paychecks for over a year: his savings account was pretty big, and he just never got around to taking them to the bank.
Finally, he needed to buy something big, and got out his stack of paychecks. He noticed that some of them were stale dated, so he carried them over to the business office of the small, struggling computer business we worked for. A minute later, the book keeper ran upstairs to see the president, her face white as a sheet. If he had cashed the checks which were still valid, he'd have bankrupted the business.
They worked out an installment plan to get him paid, and made him promise to ALWAYS cash his checks the day he got them.
While the business lasted, we joked about his ``attempt to take over the business''.
Low pay always means more control (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Low pay always means more control (Score:2)
Makes sense (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Lower pay jobs tend to be hourly. Well if employers are paying by the hour, they want to maje sure they get what they pay for. Likewise by the hour jobs generally include OT pay, which they don't want to pay if they can avoid it. Higher pay jobs are more often salaried so it doesn't matter as much. Sure you may come into work 15 minutes late but you also may be asked to work all weekend at no extra pay.
2) Lower pay jobs tend to be more time oriented, less results oriented. Like McDonal
Re:Low pay always means more control (Score:2)
Makes sense to me. Generally, the people at the lowest pay fall into three categories:
1. Students trying to pick up a bit of cash on the side.
2. Retirees who want to keep busy.
3. People who couldn't get a better job.
It is categories 1 and 3 that need watching. Category 1 because they are "above" the job and probably not too worried about getting fired (and hence more likely to risk putting a millipede in your Big Mac), and category 3 because these are people who cannot follow instructions reliably (and
Re:Low pay always means more control (Score:4, Interesting)
While what you say is true, the truth is more obvious the other way around:
The less your employers NEED to control you, the more you will get paid
In other words, honest, hard working, exemplary and talented individuals get paid more.
This is no different to a Timecard system... (Score:3, Insightful)
What am I missing here - they are paying for labour, so why shouldn't they make sure people start on time?
Re:This is no different to a Timecard system... (Score:2)
I expect my employer to get value for my salary but given that I like many others work more hours that I get paid for I will not tolerate micromanagent of my workday by my employer.
Re:This is no different to a Timecard system... (Score:2)
Now if some place gets over zealous with this, they'll simply find themselves u
Their time, their rules (Score:5, Insightful)
When your employer is paying for your time, they have a right to measure how much of it they are getting. Just like you have a right to put that bag of sugar on the scales and check that it really is 1kg.
Seems reasonable enough to me, anyway.
Why the whining? (Score:2)
Biometrics is not necessarily equivalent to privacy invasion.
Re:Why the whining? (Score:2)
Re:Why the whining? (Score:2)
Because they tend to be working in larger numbers and the companies they work for typcially have smaller margins. Also, with customer service companies, when Chuck the fry cook decides to leave an hour early and have Molly punch him out, it could lead to soggy fries and unhappy customers.
Do you have enough of an understanding of these companies and their balan
yuck! are those scanners grease-proof? (Score:2)
Canadian law? (Score:5, Insightful)
If what I assume is correct, there is no reason for McDonalds to not use the hand/fingerprint data in some other way, if they wanted to, for example checking for criminal records, as mentioned in the article. They say they won't use the data for anything else, but they have also said their food is healthy. Would employees have the right to be informed if McDonalds suddenly used the hand/fingerprint data for something other than clocking in and out? Plus, it is not impossible for this data to be stolen and then abused. Who would then be responsible, under Canadian law? If employees have weaker protection under the law, does this mean that employers aren't required to secure the personal data of its employees the same way an e-tailer is required to the secure personal data of its customers?
Another problem is what happens when this technology becomes mainstream, and used in most workplaces. It is understandably used in workplaces where security is an issue, and for now it's only McDonalds and a handful of other places that do not have the same security concerns as say, a nuclear power plant. The more use, the more potential for abuse. Workers need to have their rights secured before these devices are used. I just hope Manitoba (and the other provinces lacking strong provincial privacy legislation) wake up and create new laws to protect the people!
Re:Canadian law? (Score:3, Interesting)
Fortunately, the UK's Data Protection Act doesn't differentiate between the two. You can look up any employer and see exactly what they claim to store.
(With "claim" beinging the operative world here!! I live in the real world)
PS, fingerprint scanners are common-as-muck in Glasgow pubs.
Provided they don' t share the info (Score:2)
It's highly unlikely they're making full palmprint data available to any shadowy organisations, rather than simply using a hash of the data to authenticate users. It's a non-issue.
Bad News (Score:2)
Re:Bad News (Score:2)
Is it THAT bad? (Score:4, Interesting)
This is a completely valid viewpoint. My main question is how is this an invasion of privacy? I wouldn't have a problem scanning in my hand to check in to work -- but it seems that a lot of people do. I guess letting companies having biometric information could be the beginning of a long and slippery slope, but I can't really see a worst case scenario... someone care to visualize it for me?
In other news, this would meet a lot greater resistance if McDonald's allowed its workers to form unions. The restaurants have some of the worst turnover because the working conditions are abismal and the company squashes any attempts at its workers to form unions. More information can be found in the book Fast Food Nation [amazon.com] which I definitely recommend as a good read -- it goes into worker treatment at both fast food restaurants as well as meat packing plants and the entire fast food industry as a whole, from advertising to production to health issues. I recommend as a read although be warned, you may not want to go back to McDonald's again. I haven't gone back. But that's because their food tastes like crap.
Re:Is it THAT bad? (Score:2, Interesting)
I am one of those who would have a big problem with scanning into work with my palm, fingers, eyeballs, or whatever, unless I worked at a military installa
Re:Is it THAT bad? (Score:2)
The scene in "Minority Report" where Tom Cruise was getting bombarded with personalised advertising as a result of a retina scan? It might be OK if you've just bought a shiny new Lexus, but it's not so OK if you've just bought a "marital aid"...
Re:Is it THAT bad? (Score:2)
We have a swipe in/out card (Score:3, Informative)
Re:We have a swipe in/out card (Score:2)
There has even been an incident of two people cramming into a revolving door so that one person (me) could get a discounted lunch.
So? Punch cards are old hat. (Score:5, Interesting)
I work for a public utility. We had the hand punch system years ago. ( I always threatened to make a rubber hand, but never got around to it. ) Now we have the finger print reader instead. Overall, it tends to help both sides, since employees can often prove they were on site even if their supervisors weren't sure.
As a side note, biometric data can leak. Our finger print database is intentionally stored at a slightly lower resolution than the federal standard. The reason is that if we kept government quality information, we'd be required to surrender a copy of that information to the government. Now that's scary.
Wrong approach (Score:3, Insightful)
His 50 employees would often "buddy-punch," ... "They're typical workers," Mr. Nordmann said. "It's not nice work. You have a lot of turnover. You have them one week, and the next week they're gone. You can't tell the faces any more."
What a wonderful view of workers. Sort of Victorian workhouse style. He could always try treating his staff well enough that they don't cheat the system or quit all the time.
Re:Wrong approach (Score:2)
I do during the summers, when I'm home from school.
Let me tell you, it is next to impossible to find GOOD work. Most people you find are either lazy and slackers and don't pull their share of work at all, or they call in sick every other day.
I worked at a Large Landscaping company, and new employees would be trusted driving delivery trucks. My first day, when I was 16, they sent me to the other side of town to drop some mulch off a
Re:Wrong approach (Score:2)
- Paid well
- Gave decent breaks
- Had a reasonable pension and perks scheme.
- Had a promotion structure for good workers.
The places that were almost entirely temps and had high turnover did none of those (if you're ever on Brighton pier, please take the time to punch one of the managers for me).
Many workers piss about and
Hmmmmmm (Score:2)
Big Deal (Score:2)
Been doing this for years... (Score:2)
Now if they gave these file to the government then I'd be pissed off. But they haven't done that yet.
I'd love to see laws preventing that from happening by the way. Of course all someone will have to do to stop it is scream "Terrorists!" and it'll die in the arse.
But I seriously don't see why people are complaining, its not t
Re:Been doing this for years... (Score:2)
How do you know? And do you think they'd tell you if you did?
We Don't All Have Palms (Score:4, Insightful)
Firsthand Experience (Score:4, Interesting)
Bad not necessarily because of privacy... (Score:2, Insightful)
A little workplace entropy distracts from the oppressive order of day to day work.
Free the oppressed worker kill the capitalist pigs (Score:4, Insightful)
In any environment where you have high turn over finding a way to track workers is critical, especially in low margin businesses like fast food. Business implements changes out of (hopefully intelligent) self interest, not part some conspiracy to "control" workers. Now, do there need to be safeguards in place to make sure corporations don't share biometrics as well as other personal data, absolutely. However, American corporations are so afraid of being sued most only confirm employement dates of former employees, rather than telling the truth, even when the former employee deserves a negative review. So I find it hard to imagine the circumstance where some minimum wage worker's handprint is so valuable that a corporation is willing to part with the data, and take the risk of a high profile lawsuit. The only real exception to this is of course, the government. There is a potential for abuse there, and if I were a potential employee I would like to know what the employer's policy on information requests from law enforcement looks like, ie do they require a subpoena etc. Also how long will the company keep the information would be something I would ask.
Copyrighting Body Parts (Score:2)
Put your money where your mouth is, then (Score:2)
Want to be Subversive? (Score:5, Interesting)
-False positives (%)
-False negatives (%)
-Acceptance
The first two are objectively measurable over time. The latter covers peoples' reluctance to, say, put a DNA probe in their mouth, or put their eye to a retinal scanner for fear of catching pinkeye, or whatnot.
Biometrics themselves can be used to _identify_ someone, but relying on them as a catch-all solution to _authenticate_ is lame (authentication is performed by a combination of what you know, what you have, or what you are--think ATM card + PIN code.) Biometric systems are, under certain circumstances, a good complement to another ID mechanism, no different, for example, than using a GSM card for your mobile phone.
That said, I don't like biometric systems for something like timesheet checking. Aside from the fact that it's undignified and ham-handed (looks great on powerpoint!) there is the danger of non-repudiation in the case of a false positive. Most technical types understand this concet, but do you really think your average manager will believe Joe Frycook that he was present, if for some reason the handprint scanner had a glitch?
The other thing I take issue with is the possibility of a leak or misuse of sensitive data. A time card or ID is a physical object, usually limited to a specific use. However, if an employer has, say, a perfect thumbprint scan of mine, what's stopping him from sharing it? From using it in other, less legitimate areas (hiring a private security firm to check my laptop to see if I'm letting my girlfriend use it, whatever.) Sound paranoid?
It bugs me to see responses along the lines of "if you've nothing to hide, why are you concerned?" I'm concerned because, first, I'm a bit of a naive idealist and believe that people should be treated like human beings, not innately distrusted. And second, I've seen some fairly catastrophic examples of what can go wrong with any technology.
That said, there's a sociological theory that every human being has an innate tendency to want to sabotage authority in some small way--riding the bus without a ticket, cheating on their taxes, etc. My own insignificant little tactics involve trying to make factor #3, acceptance, lower for biometric ID systems--sneeze on eyeball scanners, smear boogers on hand readers, stick gum on camera lenses, whatever.
A few years ago, some German state had to hire private security guards to watch speed cameras, because the locals were taking shotguns to 'em. Cost them a lot of money, and sent a bit of a signal. I'm no anarchist, but occasionally the yay-biometrics mob could use a bit of the same medicine.
Re:Want to be Subversive? (Score:3, Interesting)
Biometrics can be bad but a primarily benign (Score:3, Interesting)
BTW, Fast food isn't the only place the beef about being a minute or two late. I once worked for Meijer, a family owned chain of gorcery/superstores and they would chew you out whenever your one minute late into or out of work, breaks and lunches. I don't know if tehy stil do this, but when I worked, Meijer had a saying...the run for 1. They wanted to have only 1 percent overhead. That meant you sold a lot of damaged goods (at a SLIGHLTLY reduced price) as long as the packaging wasn't mangled too bad. I thought it was nuts and eventually they did drop it realizing it was impossible to do this. Nickel and diming employees regarding their time is just counterproductive and will result in you loosing a employee who may have just had a bad commute or a bad morning wrestling with the kids and is normally on time and a very good worker. I ain't saying you should not punish repeat offenders or even defining a standard, but if someone is late say once in 3 months, I think that is pretty good! Another thing that could be done is for every minute your late, you stay over that many minutes. Also, use overlapping schedules. If you schedule so tight that you can't afford to have people that are late, that's YOUR problem, not your employee's.
I saw a finger print ID system... (Score:2)
One thing these new systems do offer you is a rock solid alibi (sp?). It definitely proves where you were at that time. As for privacy concerns... well, you were supposed to be at work anyway, right? Is the company getting any extra information by collecting your ti
Avoids Employer getting Sanctioned by Labor Laws (Score:2)
"punch me in" is a common request when there are time cards or swipe cards. If the swipe card is needed for access you just have your buddy open the door when you get there.
The entity that gets in trouble when this happens is usually the employer, because laws require them to "maintain accurate records" of work hours. The palm print prevents "clock me in" unless
Yes, it is a privacy violation (Score:5, Interesting)
IIRC, a law was recently passed which allows the FBI to collect a business' records without a subpeona. Which means that if your employer has your fingerprints, so does the FBI.
Someone could very easily lose their anonymity by simply working for the wrong employer. The Burlington Northern example is a case in point - IIRC, employees were forced to undergo mandatory genetic testing; those with a genetic tendency toward carpal tunnel syndrome were fired. Now the FBI has access to the genetic information for every one of BN's employees who was tested.
To be honest, the confidentiality promises a company makes mean nothing. Every company has a disclaimer stating that they will divulge information to comply with law enforcement and some (such as Ebay) make it a point to market this service to law enforcement.
Our lives are no longer private. If it is in a company database somewhere, the FBI now has access to it. The only safe option is to not turn over information you don't want the government to have to anyone, for any reason.
Record when they get there... (Score:2)
OMG!!! PRIVACY!!! BIG BROTHER!!! CALL THE UCLA!!
It's called a timeclock, dumbass. We've got one at work, although I don't use my palm, I use a userID and password. Why? I'm PAID HOURLY. Think my boss is gonna let us tell him "yeah, we all worked 8 hours today" without some sort of proof?
That's very nice but.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't be so quick.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Do you people even know how most of this works?! (Score:3, Informative)
yeah, I'm an employer. (Score:5, Insightful)
Undervalued?!! (Score:3, Interesting)
I thought this story was about fast-food workers, not teachers. Since when are these people underpaid and undervalued? They may not make very much money, and they may have to work a lot of hours and do mundane tasks, but what VALUE do they really offer to society? Not that they don't deserve respect for the job they perform, but they would not be anywhere in the top 100 undervalued workers. Not every job has the same value in our society. Our society rewards some pretty ridiculous jobs in our society, and rewards some only a fraction of their true value, but fast food workers are not one of those.
Re:selfridges london has it already (Score:5, Funny)
Ain't that like management? Check the employee in/out times with an atomic clock, work out the overtime with a sundial...
Re:selfridges london has it already (Score:2)
No, that indicates the system is working flawlessly.. from the point of view of management anyway. It ensures the staff are firmly controlled and it provides a neat way of saying "you're not getting any overtime you horrible little peon" - it is far easier to say "oh, the computer must have got it wrong again, we'll sort it out next time". People will believe anything of computers..
Re:strange but (Score:2)
Re:Freedom (Score:2)
It isn't a degree of control, it's expecting workers to show up on time. Nothing wrong with that. All it does is weed out the dishonest folk, who are also probably the ones who would spit in your fries. Yay for technology.
No they are requiring registration by .... (Score:2)
Punishment for non-compliance is stiff. The project was supposed to cost $10 million. Current cost is over a billion and rising. extimated 80% of people are just ignoring the law.
I guess it's true outlaw guns and only criminals will have them.
Like the RCMP says "You have no need to defend yourself. Just get on the radio and call us and we will hunt across the entire NW territories to catch who ever it was that just murdered you."