Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#31

Post by WalterBright »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #26
WalterBright wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you misunderstood that the point of it was to demonstrate your higher value and hence you were worth more pay. If you choose to do as little as possible, it does make for a tough negotiating position when asking for more pay. When I've gone into my boss's office and negotiated for more pay, I'd come in prepared to show how I'd already demonstrated higher value to the company. Sometimes I walked out with a rai…

Forgive me for making assumptions about you, but, you sound as though you have never even known anyone who worked this kind of job. What you're describing would likely earn you enmity or a very antagonistic working relationship with your coworkers.

I do understand that demonstrating higher value and then successfully negotiating for a raise can earn you the enmity of your coworkers. People are only human, after all.

On the other hand, I knew coworkers who were thieves and justified it with their notions of entitlement. I didn't exactly feel inclined to trust them, either, and trust is a basic element of friendship.

So I guess we all get to make our choices and accept the consequences.

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#32

Post by thex86 »

As a person who generally prefers to be private wherever possible, I am still divided on a related topic: security cameras. I don't want them to be recorded everywhere I go, but then on the other hand, I do realize that the world does have a few bad people and in many cases, they are caught with the help of cameras/CCTV footage.

I had always wondered if someone can shed some light on this debate from the other side perhaps and this article comes close.

I have still not figured out where I stand on the CCTV cameras in public places though.

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#33

Post by WalterBright »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #28
WalterBright wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where did you get that idea? Details of cases I am familiar with, and talking with lawyer friends who tell me that, although it is not supposed to be that way, jurors and judges often give the benefit of any doubt to the perceived underdog. There's a reason why lawyers carefully dress their clients in certain ways, select jurors based on socioeconomic status, etc.

You think a person who makes minimum wage-ish + tips can hire one of your friends to sue their manager / boss / restaurant owner over wage / tip discrepancies? Do you think your coworkers who depend upon their waitstaff job to support their family / college education will agree to testify or be deposed in proceedings against their employer? Have you really thought about this?

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/labor_standards_bureau/publicati...

States all have their mechanisms where a worker can file a complaint without needing a lawyer.

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#34

Post by jka »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #22
jka wrote: post #5

I think the article in question spins a very positive light on surveillance - in the given context, theft has been occurring and is curtailed by the change in behaviour of staff, regardless of whether or not action is taken based on the surveillance being present. The larger problem with surveillance is that there is no global notion of what is 'right' and 'wrong' - theft is assumed wrong to almost everyone, but few…

> positive light on surveillance Positive for whom? Do you suppose NCR offers a product that helps waitstaff recoup tips stolen from staff by restaurant owners/managers?

Quite the opposite - a positive for restaurant managers and business owners:

"The software is intentionally set so that a restaurant manager gets only an electronic theft alert in cases that seem to clearly be misconduct. Otherwise, a manager might be mired in time-consuming detective work instead of running the restaurant."

Equals: "managers: persuade your boss to buy our product and you will have more free time"

"The impact, the researchers say, came not from firing workers engaged in theft, but mostly from their changed behavior. Knowing they were being monitored, the servers not only pulled back on any unethical practices, but also channeled their efforts into, say, prompting customers to have that dessert or a second beer, raising revenue for the restaurant and tips for themselves."

Equals: "restaurant owners: we will improve your bottom line, and nebulously your staff may end up working harder for tips, so it's all good, here's an argument you can use if anyone complains"

Interesting that customers are arguably pressured into consuming more by the new configuration as well.

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#35

Post by acheron »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #26
WalterBright wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you misunderstood that the point of it was to demonstrate your higher value and hence you were worth more pay. If you choose to do as little as possible, it does make for a tough negotiating position when asking for more pay. When I've gone into my boss's office and negotiated for more pay, I'd come in prepared to show how I'd already demonstrated higher value to the company. Sometimes I walked out with a rai…

Forgive me for making assumptions about you, but, you sound as though you have never even known anyone who worked this kind of job. What you're describing would likely earn you enmity or a very antagonistic working relationship with your coworkers.

> What you're describing would likely earn you enmity or a very antagonistic working relationship with your coworkers.

I.e., the old crabs in a bucket story. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#37

Post by aestra »

WalterBright wrote: post #16
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"When someone pays you minimum wage he is trying to say he would pay you less if it wasn't against the law." -- Chris Rock I agree, but it is hard for me to find sympathy for businessmen who hold wages so low. This behavior is widespread in the restaurant business, and it isn't limited to the staff stealing from the restaurant.

Sympathy has nothing to do with it. If you feel your wages are too low, negotiate for higher ones. If that doesn't work, accept it or quit. If you've been wronged, you have access to redress from the courts, and the courts are very sympathetic towards workers in disputes with employers.

This is funny. I worked close to minimum wage at a restaurant before. There was no wage negotiation. We had people coming in every single day looking for a job to work minimum wage. I would have been replaced in an hour, there was no leverage. What was I going to do?

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#38

Post by jka »

jka wrote: post #34
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> positive light on surveillance Positive for whom? Do you suppose NCR offers a product that helps waitstaff recoup tips stolen from staff by restaurant owners/managers?

Quite the opposite - a positive for restaurant managers and business owners: "The software is intentionally set so that a restaurant manager gets only an electronic theft alert in cases that seem to clearly be misconduct. Otherwise, a manager might be mired in time-consuming detective work instead of running the restaurant." Equals: "managers: persuade your boss to buy our product and you will have more free time" "T…

In fact, it's conceivable that this may be a PR piece commissioned by NCR - the author is a freelance writer/photographer, and I know from experience that PR staff/agencies do contact writers to craft positive articles for newspapers.

Could be wrong - either way, this kind of stuff does happen unfortunately (a huge network of incentives which generally have negative impacts on the uninformed/powerless).

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#39

Post by mikeash »

sp332 wrote: post #20
silencio wrote: post #2

Some anecdotal evidence: I took over a restaurant a few months ago. Half the surveillance cameras don't work. I don't have video for every incident I know occurs there. But just having the cameras look like they're kind of working is enough. I had an employee that stole a bunch of cheese and pastrami (I know, right, what's the point of stealing $50 worth of cheese and a block of pastrami?) inside empty pickle buckets…

Since law enforcement can demand your footage after the fact, your cameras are actually contributing to surveillance en masse.

Depends on what you consider to be "surveillance en masse" and what the laws are like where you operate.

I would equate "surveillance en masse" to be cameras that are constantly watched by the government, tracking me in my daily life even though I have done nothing wrong.

In a legal environment where police need a warrant to compel private shop owners to turn over surveillance footage, an owner who installs cameras and requires warrants (this is key, plenty of people will just bow to any request) is not contributing to what I would consider to be the problem.

Re: How Surveillance Changes Behavior: A Restaurant Workers Case Study

#40

Post by Strilanc »

saraid216 wrote: post #10
nodata wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the people who like their job less because you don't trust them?

Trust, but verify. Same reason contracts are written down.

Ah yes, the old "I want it both ways" statement.

Trust is the belief that you don't need to verify.

Post reply on HN