Ring Cameras Are Being Used To Control and Surveil Overworked Delivery Workers (vice.com) 75
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Networked doorbell surveillance cameras like Amazon's Ring are everywhere, and have changed the nature of delivery work by letting customers take on the role of bosses to monitor, control, and discipline workers, according to a recent report (PDF) by the Data & Society tech research institute. "The growing popularity of Ring and other networked doorbell cameras has normalized home and neighborhood surveillance in the name of safety and security," Data & Society's Labor Futures program director Aiha Nguyen and research analyst Eve Zelickson write. "But for delivery drivers, this has meant their work is increasingly surveilled by the doorbell cameras and supervised by customers. The result is a collision between the American ideas of private property and the business imperatives of doing a job."
Thanks to interviews with surveillance camera users and delivery drivers, the researchers are able to dive into a few major developments interacting here to bring this to a head. Obviously, the first one is the widespread adoption of doorbell surveillance cameras like Ring. Just as important as the adoption of these cameras, however, is the rise of delivery work and its transformation into gig labor. [...] As the report lays out, Ring cameras allow customers to surveil delivery workers and discipline their labor by, for example, sharing shaming footage online. This dovetails with the "gigification" of Amazon's delivery workers in two ways: labor dynamics and customer behavior.
"Gig workers, including Flex drivers, are sold on the promise of flexibility, independence and freedom. Amazon tells Flex drivers that they have complete control over their schedule, and can work on their terms and in their space," Nguyen and Zelickson write. "Through interviews with Flex drivers, it became apparent that these marketed perks have hidden costs: drivers often have to compete for shifts, spend hours trying to get reimbursed for lost wages, pay for wear and tear on their vehicle, and have no control over where they work." That competition between workers manifests in other ways too, namely acquiescing to and complying with customer demands when delivering purchases to their homes. Even without cameras, customers have made onerous demands of Flex drivers even as the drivers are pressed to meet unrealistic and dangerous routes alongside unsafe and demanding productivity quotas. The introduction of surveillance cameras at the delivery destination, however, adds another level of surveillance to the gigification. [...] The report's conclusion is clear: Amazon has deputized its customers and made them partners in a scheme that encourages antagonistic social relations, undermines labor rights, and provides cover for a march towards increasingly ambitious monopolistic exploits. As Nguyen and Zelickson point out, it is ingenious how Amazon has "managed to transform what was once a labor cost (i.e., supervising work and asset protection) into a revenue stream through the sale of doorbell cameras and subscription services to residents who then perform the labor of securing their own doorstep."
Thanks to interviews with surveillance camera users and delivery drivers, the researchers are able to dive into a few major developments interacting here to bring this to a head. Obviously, the first one is the widespread adoption of doorbell surveillance cameras like Ring. Just as important as the adoption of these cameras, however, is the rise of delivery work and its transformation into gig labor. [...] As the report lays out, Ring cameras allow customers to surveil delivery workers and discipline their labor by, for example, sharing shaming footage online. This dovetails with the "gigification" of Amazon's delivery workers in two ways: labor dynamics and customer behavior.
"Gig workers, including Flex drivers, are sold on the promise of flexibility, independence and freedom. Amazon tells Flex drivers that they have complete control over their schedule, and can work on their terms and in their space," Nguyen and Zelickson write. "Through interviews with Flex drivers, it became apparent that these marketed perks have hidden costs: drivers often have to compete for shifts, spend hours trying to get reimbursed for lost wages, pay for wear and tear on their vehicle, and have no control over where they work." That competition between workers manifests in other ways too, namely acquiescing to and complying with customer demands when delivering purchases to their homes. Even without cameras, customers have made onerous demands of Flex drivers even as the drivers are pressed to meet unrealistic and dangerous routes alongside unsafe and demanding productivity quotas. The introduction of surveillance cameras at the delivery destination, however, adds another level of surveillance to the gigification. [...] The report's conclusion is clear: Amazon has deputized its customers and made them partners in a scheme that encourages antagonistic social relations, undermines labor rights, and provides cover for a march towards increasingly ambitious monopolistic exploits. As Nguyen and Zelickson point out, it is ingenious how Amazon has "managed to transform what was once a labor cost (i.e., supervising work and asset protection) into a revenue stream through the sale of doorbell cameras and subscription services to residents who then perform the labor of securing their own doorstep."
Nobody thinks gig work is flexible (Score:1, Interesting)
That isn't stupidity that's denial.
Everyone else doesn't pretend and they know they're being screwed but they don't know what to do about it.
I want to remind everyone that in a country wi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You are thinking of the wrong America. They may talk about "from my cold dead hands", but when push comes to shove, they hand them over to the guys in uniform that come knocking, because they know that an armed crime can mean life without parole.
I don't expect violence, other than some protestors who will eventually get rounded up, sent to prison for the rest of their lives. Look how the entire 1960s protest movement came to a screeching halt after Kent State.
Most Americans don't care what happens, provid
Re: (Score:2)
Home deliveries aren't really the thing for me since I'm at work when the delivery shall occur so I prefer to instead get my parcel at a pickup point.
So home delivery on time only matters if you are at home all day anyway.
Re:Nobody thinks gig work is flexible (Score:4, Insightful)
But you're free to choose! You can freely choose between being dragged about on the nose ring by Amazon or starve to death because you can't afford food or shelter.
You're free! Free!
Not the slave of some pesky Union that tries to dictate to you how you can or cannot negotiate with your employer. Sorry, contract partner (you have no employer, you're free!).
Re: (Score:2)
Nicely put!
Re: (Score:2)
The reason I joke is so I can open my mouth without having the urge to scream in terror.
child labor (Score:2)
Not caused by customers (Score:5, Informative)
The problem stems from Amazon trying the skirt labour laws by hiring independent contractors to do the work of employees. At requirement to bypassing the laws is to have the workers not heassigned specific tasks and have them bid on the jobs and set their own hours.
Re:Not caused by customers (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm always reminded of Walmart's slogan, save money live better. It's a remarkably insidious idea. You're not breaking labor unions and looking the other way while mega corporations grind human beings under their boot for a fast buck. You're saving money, living better.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
To be fair those customers cheerfully elect politicians that look the other way while Amazon does that. So there's plenty of blame to go around. I'm always reminded of Walmart's slogan, save money live better. It's a remarkably insidious idea. You're not breaking labor unions and looking the other way while mega corporations grind human beings under their boot for a fast buck. You're saving money, living better.
So you are saying that liberating the wealthy, the most persecuted among us from injustices such as for example, the violence of taxation is wrong? Why do you hate the capitalist utopia so much? If you just picked yourself up by your bootstraps and made the simple choice to become rich, you too could live in the lap of luxury. It's that simple, all you have to do is decide to be rich. If Ben Shapiro says it, it must be true.
Re: (Score:2)
But mentioning Ben Shapiro tipped your hand. Because nobody believes anything Ben Shapiro says. Including an especially him.
Re:Not caused by customers (Score:5, Insightful)
Likewise if packages are not be delivered properly, the customer well might complain. I have left packages left on my lawn, blocking my door, not left as instructed although it requires no additional effort. Much of this is caused by the heavy demands of the work. And lower pay with less professional delivery people than when UPS and FedEx controlled the industry.
What ring cameras do is allow the customer to prove they are not just being mean. That the worker did not do the job. It seems that the customer is being the supervisor because the supervisor is no longer making the decision based on subjective hearsay. There is objective evidence. The supervisor can no longer say how his sister in law is the best worker and the customer is lying.
Honestly, these cameras though maybe annoying are a critical piece of infrastructure that lets the emerging new economy work. I have had to use it to prove that I am correct, and not being mean, and this ability gives me the confidence to use these services.
Re:Not caused by customers (Score:4, Insightful)
What ring cameras do is allow the customer to prove they are not just being mean. That the worker did not do the job.
I think that cameras actually work to the benefit of the drivers that are doing what they are supposed to be doing - it can show that they DID do their job. If the parcel isn't there because it was stolen later, it's immediately clear to the owner.
At the end of the day, the driver has a pretty basic job - get to the destination, and deliver the parcel without dropping it, smashing the owner's garden gnome collection or kicking the dog.
GPS routing makes it easier than ever before to navigate around and predict how long it will take to get from point A to point B, and routing handlers can see how drivers are progressing along their routes. Anyone who is doing their job properly, delivering parcels safely, driving within limits and not slacking off with unscheduled stops has all the proof they could wish for that they are doing their job properly and has ample evidence to use against their employer if they are being treated unfairly with unreasonable delivery schedules or being accused of slacking off, but on the flip side, those that are doing wrong by their employers can no longer hide and can't shoulder the burden onto other honest workers.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? How about your employer puts a camera on you to make sure you are working to their standards. At some point, when you finally realize you have no control over your work life, you'll find other employment...or not if all the other employers also employ cameras.
Re: (Score:2)
Cameras weren't invented yesterday. Cameras were in the hands of employers, and others, many, many years before. Your employer has many forms of control over your work life. Many of which can be skewed and manipulated by others or can be subjective like performance reviews. Cameras at least have a moment in time that can be played over and over.
It's one of the controls that also empowers the delivery drivers. Often drivers take pictures or video of the package delivered.
Re: (Score:2)
>Cameras weren't invented yesterday. Cameras were in the hands of employers, and others, many, many years before.
Correct. So why aren't they being used in every office in the US? Maybe because it is too invasive? Could that also be the case here?
Interesting points to ponder!
Re: (Score:1)
Mostly because evaluating professional work via cameras isn't very helpful at measuring productivity or adherence to work rules.
Suppose I'm debugging a problem that no one else has been able to (or bothered to) figure out and I find the bug that has been in the system for two years, hits a customer somewhere once every six months and creates havoc when it hits. A video of me tracking down the bug might be useful as a training exercise (although it woul
Re: (Score:2)
That is the thing with worker surveillance. It really does cut both ways. Nobody really likes to feel they are being watched constantly but most (good) employees actually like a little not to intrusive checking up happening.
It saves them having to tattle on Bob who never pulls his weight, and they are not supervisors so they should not have deal with the social and emotional fallout that comes with that. And in many situations there could be poltics, Bob is some VP's nephew... At the same time if Bob is al
GPS routing makes them park unsafely, non truck ro (Score:3)
GPS routing makes them park unsafely, some time may send them down non truck roads, some times send them roads that don't go anywhere (bad map data), force them to piss into an bottle as they can't take an brake, may force them to drive over the limits to keep on time as the GPS may not have live traffic data, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
How would you feel about keystroke monitors on a desk job, or cameras inside your cubicle? Only a problem if you're not doing your job, of course.
We're going to "scrutinize" lots of occupations into having nobody interested in doing them.
Re: (Score:2)
One apocryphal story was of needed your key card for the bathroom. So they could track you. Where I worked honest employees went through the back entrance, leaving a record of when the worked. Less honest suck in through the front, where no objective record existed.
The fact is a more objective paper trail is the reality. In school tests and assignments are online, and there is no more
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
These days, with police defunded, people have to resort to anything for security, even it means grasping at straws or having to veer into vigilantism. Ring does that. Show me someone doing anything to lower crime. Cities don't care about crime. In fact, it means that the city council gets to buy property on the cheap and flip it. Most neighbors are turning into either rental areas or just rows of short term rentals, and those people don't really care enough... and don't vote.
Ring is arguably one of the few things people have to protect themselves, at best perhaps finding a culprit after an act is done.
Defunded; you are so right: https://abcnews.go.com/US/defu... [go.com]
Re:It reduces crime... enough said (Score:4, Insightful)
These days, with police defunded
I don't think that an imaginary trend occurring solely in the feverish nightmares of Fox News hosts is really a good justification for creating a surveillance state.
Show me someone doing anything to lower crime. Cities don't care about crime.
Well, if you're defining "doing anything" as spending more on law enforcement, which you seem to be doing, I guess you could have a look at the many, many large cities on this list that increased law enforcement spending. [github.io]
I get that the little people in your TV keep screaming at you about how crime is out of control, what with all the brown people coming across the border and into your pure, white neighborhood, but neither property crime [statista.com] nor violent crime [statista.com] are exactly running wild.
Calm down, stop buying and installing a surveillance network for the government, and go back to writing your manifesto. You're supposed to be *opposed* to this bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It reduces crime... enough said (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It reduces crime... enough said (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It reduces crime... enough said (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When seconds count, help is only minutes away.
It is trite, but true. We all have to be able to rely on ourselves for our immediate needs. Emergency preparedness, whether that be learning first aid/CPR or having a fire extinguisher in the kitchen or even having a means of self defense, is important.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't think that an imaginary trend occurring solely in the feverish nightmares of Fox News hosts is really a good justification for creating a surveillance state.
Yeah, we all collectively just imagined those cities burning down two summers ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It reduces crime... enough said (Score:2)
"Control and Surveil Overworked Delivery Workers" (Score:2)
But why? Why surveil only the Overworked Delivery Workers? The ones who are underworked will feel neglected. Shouldn't all workers have equal opportunity for control and surveillance?
This type of headline should tickle your Spidey sense that the author has an agenda.
Re: "Control and Surveil Overworked Delivery Worke (Score:1)
Jesus Christ. (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone wrote those words with a straight face? People are going fucking crazy. Nobody is outsourcing surveillance on the poor downtrodden gig workers, and the only time anyone gives a shit is if they do something pretty bad, is the argument that people's doorbell cameras are allowing them to be caught doing shit they shouldn't do?
And what kind of progressive "muh labor!" look thinks people bought their cameras to make sure the guy delivering their hammock from Amazon doesn't walk across the lawn.
Seriously, can you imagine being the kind of shrill asshole that writes junk like this for Vice, or being the credulous dimwit who reads it and thinks it's a real thing?
Ever been to a Walmart (Score:3, Interesting)
Amazon is doing the same thing but they're using cameras. The point isn't to actually have the surveillance it's to have the workers wondering if they're being surveilled. And based on extensive studies
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, but that's all nonsense. People buy the cameras to watch for crime and for ease of answering the door. They don't buy them to watch delivery drivers, and Amazon doesn't sell them for that purpose. It's like the weirdo evolutionary biologists who come up with these whack reasons things evolved the way they did.
As for the supposed gig workers driving shitty, everybody drives shitty. You're picking a few events and creating a narrative out of it. Are you an evolutionary biologist by any chance?
Re: (Score:3)
They don't buy them to watch delivery drivers, and Amazon doesn't sell them for that purpose.
Working with Amazon deliveries was the main reason the company acquired Ring in the first place. They didn't just see a doorbell camera and think "say, with that thing we can be like Batman and Arthur at the same time, let's snatch them up!". The whole plan was to work with smart locks so packages could be delivered into the home when you weren't there, and, in combination with an indoor camera, the driver could be monitored to make sure they didn't touch any of your stuff with their genitals or whatever.
Re: (Score:3)
What came first? The chicken or the egg? Amazon didn't invent the doorbell camera just like it didn't invent the punch clock.
This isn't like "weirdo evolutionary biologists who come up with these whack reasons things evolved the way they did," whatever the hell that means.
It's exactly that. They saw a solution to their problem and decided to own it so they can customize it to their needs. When a combination of tools are useful together they are often sold as complete packages. Cameras and doorbells have been around a lot longer than Ring.
Re:Ever been to a Walmart (Score:4, Insightful)
Its hard to reason about this stuff actually.
The progressives make the argument all the time things like ring camera's are all part of some elaborate plot to oppress people - rolls eyes.
More reasonable people suggest that these things might be easily abused and used in initially unexpected ways. Which is fare enough in that unintended consequences are real.
The problem comes when people use these abuse cases often hypothetical to stop facially neutral activities. Even when not hypothetical the automatically jump to the conclusion the unintended consequence is A) universally seen as negative, B) outweighs the realized benefit of the intended effect.
Put up doorbell camera - goal - stop package theft. Supposed consequence Amazon data-mines it to see which delivery gig-works take 5min longer than their routing item says it should move a package from the pickup point the customers doorstep, and deprioritizes them or something. First this may or may not actually be bad or unfair and second the doorbell cam may actually be preventing a lot of package theft. Its not REALLY solid reasoning to come out against doorbell cams.
We see this play out in issue after issue and its utterly paralyzing and I think leads to a lot bad policy. The moment you hear someone say 'this will impact the most vulnerable' you basically know their argument is disingenuous, silly or both. Why because by definition vulnerability in that context is about lack of stability, ANY change in policy/activity etc you make is most likely to tip their apple cart as opposed to any other.
Re: Ever been to a Walmart (Score:2)
If I were to buy a Ring camera, it would be to watch the delivery people. They come to my house virtually every week. Criminals? Not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Second, is shrink reduction the only or even primary reason Walmart has greeters? If it is, are you bothered by that reasonable and non-invasive measure? More than the security cameras?
And why is any of it a problem? What's wrong with keeping an eye on employ
Re: (Score:1)
Not even a pretense of objectivity.
Don't work. (Score:3)
I am serious. If everyone was lazy, society would be much better off with bosses not expecting much work from people. I mean, they won't fire you because, seeing as how everyone's lazy, they won't find anyone who can replace you. I say blame hard workers. Sure, the production of goods may reduce, such that only a few people can have things like refrigerators, large screen TVs, appliances, VCRs, long distance telephones, or whatever. I say only a few people need those things anyway.
Besides, robots should be doing all manual labor, and we should be living off UBI by now.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to know a guy who worked three jobs putting in 60 to 70 hour work weeks every week at that end jobs. He was an alcoholic and working non-stop was the only thing that kept him away from drink. It was infuriating in hindsight to see the alcohol companies
Re: (Score:2)
That was your experience. Mine was seeing immigrants "who worked three jobs putting in 60 to 90 hour work weeks every week" at minimum wage buy their own business and retire rich.
The same people who complain of being employed and doing nothing about it are the same people that wouldn't pay a few pennies more so someone can earn a living wage. Look at how many complain about Walmart and Amazon and yet they are the first in line to save the pennies. If people followed their morals then Walmart and Amazon wo
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
workers need an union right now! (Score:2)
workers need an union right now!
Two idiots gat a ring alert (Score:5, Interesting)
and opened fire [sfgate.com]
Re: Two idiots gat a ring alert (Score:2, Flamebait)
I do not think they are idiots. They are on par with the 47% who voted for Trump, which means they are slightly below average intelligence (as low an IQ as that average is.)
Re: (Score:2)
"You don't shoot at people," Judd said.
This is what the US police do when a car 'flees' the scene, 'guilty until proven innocent' vigilantism.
Re: Two idiots gat a ring alert (Score:2)
Gonna take a wild guess that a drug test for both of the would come back positive for meth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck is wrong with Americans? Fucking scared of everything.
<fnord/>
goddamned slashdot and it's shitty markup support ruined my post!
labor supervision (Score:2)
"managed to transform what was once a labor cost (i.e., supervising work and asset protection) into a revenue stream through the sale of doorbell cameras and subscription services to residents who then perform the labor of securing their own doorstep."
cool, now do police body cameras
hint hint
Surveil is the wrong word. Who watches Ring 24x7? (Score:4, Insightful)
The researchers threw cameras in because it's trendy. Very few (if any) people watch their Ring 24x7 to surveil anyone. I'm not sure Ring cameras have a streaming mode.
And how does a camera make their job harder? I mean, amazon knows when the delivery is supposed to have been made, because the driver should have scanned the package at delivery. The camera what, makes sure they're wearing pants? Life is so hard.
Wrong Question: Corrective time Algorithms (Score:2)
Why vilify the customers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rather than Amazon who put unfair conditions on their gig workers, and the workers in question who do shit jobs often not delivering packages, or damaging packages.
TFS talks about shaming delivery drivers. You can't shame someone who hasn't done something shameful. Why should the customer show restraint when their package gets thrown to the front door from the fence-line, or when a gig worker steals the package after marking it as delivered, or when the driver gets out and just drops a "you weren't home" slip in the mail without ever ringing the doorbell?
The article frames the customer as a guilty party here. Guess what, the customer *is* monitoring. They are the ones paying for services and want to see it provided to them.
Re: Why vilify the customers? (Score:2)
Ring cameras turn into Big Brother (Score:2)
The end of gig labour (Score:2)
This isn't the 2010's anymore. Back then you still had both the Baby Boomers and the Millennials in the job market at the same time, and had just come out of the 2008 financial crisis that saw a "jobless" recovery. You also still had China providing all the manufacturing. At the same time, you had the bulk of the Baby Boomers getting very close to retirement age with lots of retirement savings looking for any bit of return on investment they could find. Enter the "gig economy" companies like Uber, Lyft,
Where's the problem, again? (Score:2)
I like my Ring cameras. I like knowing who is at my door before I answer it. I like knowing which direction my dogs went, if someone happens to leave the gate to the backyard open. I like that my kids enjoy talking to me and making funny faces into the camera, even when I'm not actually watching them... because they think I might be watching. I like knowing when a delivery person drops off a package -- even if they don't bother to ring the doorbell -- so I can snag it as quickly as possible, hopefully reduc
for example, sharing shaming footage online. (Score:2)
Sharing the video of them kicking the parcels from the curb over the fence into the pool is a No-No?
Go FY.
dumb article (Score:1)
Besides, what do you plan on doing about it? Make doorbell cameras illegal? Good luck
Here ya go (Score:1)
As Nguyen and Zelickson point out, it is ingenious how Amazon has "managed to transform what was once a labor cost (i.e., supervising work and asset protection) into a revenue stream through the sale of doorbell cameras and subscription services to residents who then perform the labor of securing their own doorstep." /s/ingenious/insidious
This has been the case at businesses for years (Score:2)