131–140 of 312 posts
The lack of ethics in the companies, and people that work at them, that create this software is sad and borderline demoralizing.
Counterthought: anyone who would knowingly and willingly install spyware on their personal computer deserves to lose their privacy.
No they don't. They have two choices; quit or be fired. Personally, I would quit, but I've got that type of personality. Others can't just up and quit so they comply.
Who are these others? Are you suggesting they do not have the ability to decide if they want to continue working?
MS Teams has a "green check" next to your name if you've touched your keyboard or mouse in the last five minutes and automatically sets your status to "away" if you haven't done so. I've had people at work use this to try and figure out if I'm working or not. It is a violating feeling, but also very similar to the "is your butt in the chair" way of management when not working from home, and I can see why managers lik…
> After two weeks of working from her Brooklyn apartment, a 25-year-old e-commerce worker received a staffwide email from her company: Employees were to install software called Hubstaff immediately on their personal computers so it could track their mouse movements and keyboard strokes,and record the webpages they visited. I'm 100 percent positive that I would tell this company to get stuffed if they suggested I put…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Victim blaming like this breeds radicalization. Need I say more?
Depends, could you elaborate on what you did say because I don't follow. Thanks!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bit of a tangent, but one should be careful with that path. Not all employers are 'evil' and have negative intentions for their employees. Think of an example such as the independently owned restaurant that cannot afford to pay employees high wages and their owners are not wealthy. Just as not all employees can be painted as untrustworthy and hostile, not all employers should be painted as untrustworthy and…
All employers will value the enterprise over any one of their employees individually. When is the last time you saw an employer shutter their business but continue paying their employees? It isn't that they aren't trustworthy, it is that it is a mistake to trust your employer to act in your best interest. As an example you yourself bring up, think of all the restaurants that only function because they pay their emplo…
That was pretty much all it took.
And I understand, he'd been running that business for over 20 years and started it from nothing. He was fairly successful while I was working there, but he'd been at the bottom before and would keep working back up from there again if it came down to it.
He's probably one of the best bosses i've had, he was fair and would invest in employees and the business, but the business always came first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> poor management. Uneducated decision making There is no "poor management". What are these uneducated decision makers even doing at your place of work? There's always a boss. The boss is paying for the behavior they want to see. Now if you argue the ultimate boss is clueless, then, what are you even doing there? You might want to tell yourself that your immediate boss who calls you every 30 minutes you are away from…
This style of writing where almost every sentence is its own line is weird to me. It's like writing in all caps -- if you emphasize every single point, then you emphasize none of them. Especially when it's a long post that takes up a bunch of space.
It's up to individuals as employees to decide if they want to subject themselves to this (agreed repulsive) treatment...what's with all these comments and sentiment in this thread acting like they have a gun to their head? JUST QUIT already if uncomfortable with whatever a given job entails should that include perceived invasive measures ie - surveillance.