3 ms·

Not on company time - that's the point. In this example, you can look at eg who arrives together or leaves together, then perhaps restrict that to times which a

Not on company time - that's the point. In this example, you can look at eg who arrives together or leaves together, then perhaps restrict that to times which are out of the norm, and correlate with when and how often they message each other as well. And that's a fairly straightforward one.

alchemist1e9 3y ago
And … ? Companies have policies against workplace romantic relationships for reasons that we eventually concluded in the 90s as needed to protect women. I still don’t understand. I’m pretty sure the crowd of outraged people have never been a manager or an employer. Employers realistically need to collect large amounts of information for all sorts of reasons. Especially JPM as the world’s largest bank and custodian. But even the activity level issue. These days employee can try to sue you and claim all sorts of fabricated reasons for their dismissal. By having detailed event logging you insure you have an accurate proof of empirical facts. This whole antiwork fiction story post is a bit embarrassingly childish in my opinion.
- tomatocracy 3y ago
  I agree some of the stuff in the Reddit post seems fanciful at best, but my point was that it doesn't take much data to work out things people think are relatively private - and the analysis of more "mundane" stuff can be very powerful. I thought we'd learned that lesson from Snowden but apparently it's easily forgotten. Also worth bearing in mind that just because the company has good intentions, doesn't mean the people with access to these tools and data are going to be honourable all the time - we see that routinely with those in the police, intelligence services, armed forces, etc. JPM does have regulatory obligations to collect and monitor some data (I work in the financial sector so I'm well aware of this) and I don't think it's fair to single them out here but I do think a debate around whether the privacy protections we have in place for employees are sufficient is warranted. Personally I think it's impossible to stop abuse of this type of data so the right course might well be to simply reconsider the amount of data being collected or retained despite any benefit it might bring. On the topic of workplace relationships - very few companies have policies which outright ban them - certainly none I've ever worked for. In fact I'm not even sure whether that would be legal in much of the world.

alchemist1e9 3y ago

And … ? Companies have policies against workplace romantic relationships for reasons that we eventually concluded in the 90s as needed to protect women. I still don’t understand. I’m pretty sure the crowd of outraged people have never been a manager or an employer. Employers realistically need to collect large amounts of information for all sorts of reasons. Especially JPM as the world’s largest bank and custodian. But even the activity level issue. These days employee can try to sue you and claim all sorts of fabricated reasons for their dismissal. By having detailed event logging you insure you have an accurate proof of empirical facts. This whole antiwork fiction story post is a bit embarrassingly childish in my opinion.

tomatocracy 3y ago
I agree some of the stuff in the Reddit post seems fanciful at best, but my point was that it doesn't take much data to work out things people think are relatively private - and the analysis of more "mundane" stuff can be very powerful. I thought we'd learned that lesson from Snowden but apparently it's easily forgotten. Also worth bearing in mind that just because the company has good intentions, doesn't mean the people with access to these tools and data are going to be honourable all the time - we see that routinely with those in the police, intelligence services, armed forces, etc. JPM does have regulatory obligations to collect and monitor some data (I work in the financial sector so I'm well aware of this) and I don't think it's fair to single them out here but I do think a debate around whether the privacy protections we have in place for employees are sufficient is warranted. Personally I think it's impossible to stop abuse of this type of data so the right course might well be to simply reconsider the amount of data being collected or retained despite any benefit it might bring. On the topic of workplace relationships - very few companies have policies which outright ban them - certainly none I've ever worked for. In fact I'm not even sure whether that would be legal in much of the world.