Live data from Hacker News

Employers are mining the data their workers generate

wsj.com

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#91
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A surprising number of people in management seem to think "Oh, that'll make us very silicon valley and signal how cool & hip we are!" And a surprising number of people who haven't had to work in open offices before think "Oh, that'll be cool: social, innovative, and collaborative!"

In the UK almost all offices are open offices. I am not sure of the benefits of a cubicle as i never worked in one.

Mostly sound suppressing, but does guarantee privacy (I've had to tell someone to fuck off as I'm doing managerial work)

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#92

IBM claims to be able to predict with 95% accuracy which employees will quit. This seems super helpful as an employer. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/03/ibm-ai-can-predict-with-95-p...

> 95% accuracy

Fuck everything about putting percentages without false positives and false negatives.

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#93
I’m also in this business [1], the reality is everyone has to do it to compete. These systems help you fire bad apples, which could bring down your business. Personally started my company because I saw the lack of understanding and abuse of these systems.

Not a single company I know of built their systems to increase retention. No matter what they claim, HR doesn’t really care about that - they care about bad apples. It’s for insider threat detection and mitigation. Fire the trouble makers, keep the people who do work by the system metrics. The problem is that the system metrics don’t reflect what employers look for (skill sets, influence, etc) that’s why I started my business — to focus on skill sets and knowledge retention.

In any case, is this a bad thing? I don’t know.

It’s a fine line companies that build mass surveillance tread. HR and management typically fully trust the system numbers. Meaning, the amount you spend on email becomes a promotable/fireable metric... what if you just email efficiently or you use email ineffectively, the system may not pick that up.

Most of these surveillance companies are unscrupulous and the management of the companies they sell to fall into the point system trap. There’s also no getting away from it. Every large company has, or will have these systems. So, the best thing you can do (and the difference with my company) is you make it clear to employees and try to provide benefits in some way. Our company uses as chat bot and provides a search engine. Most companies provide nothing to the employees, just monitor and fire them.

[1] https://metacortex.me/

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#96
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As well as bugging your phone. I don't think companies were ever allowed to do that.

Sure they could. It’s their phone. As long as they buried in the hiring paperwork that all calls were recorded your consent was part of your employment.

It's very different if you sign a document consenting to it than if they do it without telling you (which is considered wiretapping by federal law and is also taken very seriously). Employee agreements aren't like EULAs; you should actually read them because it's probably your livelihood.

And if they do include it in the employee agreement like you suggest, it wouldn't be too difficult to create a PR headache for them by alerting the media.

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#97

I’m also in this business [1], the reality is everyone has to do it to compete. These systems help you fire bad apples, which could bring down your business. Personally started my company because I saw the lack of understanding and abuse of these systems. Not a single company I know of built their systems to increase retention. No matter what they claim, HR doesn’t really care about that - they care about bad apples.…

Typo on your landing page, guy. "satisfaciton"

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#98
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if weren't possible now, it may be possible in the future because Slack (in practice) owns and controls that data without any oversight from you. Anything you say might be deleted after a while, or might be held indefinitely.

Well... Yeah. I didn't intend to imply that it will never be a feature (it might already be in higher tiers), and I never intended to imply anything about Slack's data retention. I was just stating that at the moment, at my tier, I am unable to see private messages.

Your employer can always change your password and then login as you to read your private messages. It leaves behind a trace (you've gotta reset your password afterwards, they can't restore your old one), but it's a "workaround".

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#99
post #5

The idea that McKesson does this, along with their completely tone deaf idea of adding open offices to increase retention, points to a bigger issue: a complete lack of understanding of people. These people running these companies are utterly detached from the reality that their work force lives day to day, such that they think implementing one of the most universally hated office schemes and mass surveillance are way…

Management isn't dumb. They understand the worker-employer balance at play. They're not going to come out directly and say they're doing this because they want ass-in-seats, they always have an official cover story. In this case, it's to "increase office retention". There is no tone-deafness going on; they know exactly what it means and what they want, and how to sell it down the chain. Think of it this way, every ti…

Think of it this way, every time management tells you that there's no raise because of budget reasons, are you really going to take that at face value?

I've believed this exactly once. When upper management also received no bonuses that year.

Re: Employers are mining the data their workers generate

#100
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a complete lack of understanding of people People? Human resources . You know, things you use up and discard, like any resource.

It used to be just "personnel," not sure when the change happened but I'd spitball around the '50s in the US. The name change was more significant than simply a fancy new title, the idea went back to WWI and the labor movement. Oddly enough, though it sounds more pejorative than "personnel" to me, "human resources" was thought to be positive as a resource is valuable. And, in fairness, while your manager typically ma…

I’m pretty sure the personnel office was around at least until the late 70s or early 80s.
Post reply on HN