4 ms·
Personally, I would not agree to being tracked by an employer, unless there was a really good reason, e.g. safety concerns, as it invites abuse of power, even u
by dognotdog 9y ago
Personally, I would not agree to being tracked by an employer, unless there was a really good reason, e.g. safety concerns, as it invites abuse of power, even unintentionally.
Stuff like this exacerbates disrespect, distrust and suspicion in employer/employee relationships, in a way I believe no one benefits. Employers tend to use these tools to aggressively police minor infractions, though pretending to only want to catch the few bad apples, driving away the good employees in favour of those who think they can game the system anyway with a tit-for-tat mindset.
In the end trust is eroded, everybody is unhappy, and the underlying issues as to why those bad apples aren't doing their jobs in the first place is never resolved or even investigated.
- Havoc 9y agoPhilosophically I agree with your stance. In practice - and particularly in my circumstances - I've found the tracking clause to be palatable, or at least begrudgingly acceptable. Perhaps my employer is an outlier, but they don't enforce minor infractions at all. So while the manual says we can track you 24/7 the reality is there is no tracking - I literally get calls from my boss asking what country I'm in because half the time they don't know where I am or what I'm doing. I've seen the actual policy employed twice - in both cases the employee did something deeply unethical. The top dogs take a very dim view on that kind of stuff so the employees found themselves on the wrong end of HR reviewing policy compliance carefully. So be it - I don't need sketchy co-workers.