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

The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#11

Post by noarchy »

EastSmith wrote: post #5
kornhole wrote: post #3

Interesting how some workers know and like the monitoring tools on themselves. Many of the debates on HN and elsewhere around this technology are split between psychologies. Many hate to be watched and controlled while others want the opposite. Being on one side of the spectrum, I was long puzzled at the other side's position until I came to accept it. I still try to understand how people have come to their position.…

I am not sure I've ever heard someone being happy for being monitored at work.

Yeah I suspect it isn't exactly a 50/50 split between "both sides" of this issue - not that the article necessarily argued that, of course.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#12

Post by 1123581321 »

Barrin92 wrote: post #7
1123581321 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.

if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's universal it's a good way to make compensation more meritocratic. Catching slackers isn't a bad thing, Only doing it in one direction is.

Makes sense--thank you.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#13

Post by 1123581321 »

clpm4j wrote: post #8
1123581321 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.

I listened to the podcast episode yesterday. Apparently some (I think they only cited one person as a source) people use it as a form of motivation and focus. They also said some women view it as a type of equalizer. But the ultimate takeaway was that the systems and the data are inherently not very accurate in their measurements.

Makes sense--thank you.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#15

Post by mise_en_place »

With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#16

Post by commandlinefan »

mise_en_place wrote: post #15

With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.

That was my first thought - I hate this, but I understand why they're doing it.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#17

Post by commandlinefan »

1123581321 wrote: post #6
kornhole wrote: post #3

Interesting how some workers know and like the monitoring tools on themselves. Many of the debates on HN and elsewhere around this technology are split between psychologies. Many hate to be watched and controlled while others want the opposite. Being on one side of the spectrum, I was long puzzled at the other side's position until I came to accept it. I still try to understand how people have come to their position.…

What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.

I've noticed that the same sort of people who support workplace surveillance are also the ones who insist they love open offices and pair programming. I think they appreciate having another person to "fall back" on when they get stuck somewhere. If their boss is constantly monitoring them, and they're unable to solve a particular problem, the boss might wander over and say, "hey Bob, you've been on this spreadsheet for a while, let me show you this formula that might help". Or at least, that's the only explanation I can think of that makes sense.

I'm the opposite - I learn best by studying and tinkering (what with having 6 years of higher education steering me that way and all...). Nothing kills that off faster than having somebody looking over your shoulder saying, "why are you looking at the HTTP specification, somebody else already knows how that works".

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#18

Post by ghaff »

mise_en_place wrote: post #15

With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.

It's a small minority of course. But you'll even get people here vehemently arguing that essentially all is fair in love and war and screw companies anyway. So you get subreddits and news stories--which probably make it perceived as a far bigger problem than it actually is--which leads at least some companies to take action. As you suggest, you have selfish pricks ruining things for everyone.

To be clear, a small moonlighting gig that's in keeping with business rules is fine. A second full-time job is almost certainly not.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#19

Post by yamtaddle »

Barrin92 wrote: post #7
1123581321 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the argument for the other side? I can see how someone would put up with it in exchange for some other benefit (money, unique company) but not how they would want it for its own sake.

if it's transparent and includes everyone including whoever is in charge it creates objective data to judge performance by. Just like pay transparency if it's universal it's a good way to make compensation more meritocratic. Catching slackers isn't a bad thing, Only doing it in one direction is.

These kinds of things rarely include the people in charge—maybe middle-managers, sometimes, but not the actual big shots. See also:

- Open office plans, except the bosses get offices (there are exceptions, as with any of these other points, but that's the norm)

- Drug testing.

- Anti-moonlighting rules or other onerous contractural restrictions or claims on time off (these kinds of things apply to higher-ups more often than the other two, but it's still common for them to be universal for the "peons" while the C-suite is allowed to have their hands in several pies at once)

In general, being less-surveilled and less-restricted at work (and off work) is a perk of higher-status positions in a company. It's a social class thing, essentially. This tendency predates computerized surveillance.

Re: The rise of workplace surveillance [audio]

#20

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

mise_en_place wrote: post #15

With this type of surveillance and the push to go back to the physical office, a lot of companies are wising up to employees who were taking multiple jobs remotely. What’s sad is that it ruins it for the rest of us, who were honest and diligently working one remote job. This is why we can’t have nice things.

Why is ok for employers to have more than one employee, but not the other way around?
Post reply on HN