Taylor 
For some time now, ethical debates on AI have been centered on issues like facial recognition. But now, in a more stealthy manner, surveillance of employees through the use of AI technology is on the rise, especially for those who work from home. More than public surveillance, the increased monitoring of activity in our homes has a much greater ethical implication. This article analyzes the history of employee monitoring, the problem of AI-driven surveillance in remote work, and employee privacy infringements.
From Time Studies to Algorithmic Oversight
The concept of watching over employees is not new. It started with Frederick Taylor’s “scientific management” in the early twentieth century, focusing on “time and motion” studies of optimizing a worker’s movements. This paradigm that relied heavily on control has not only survived but has also changed. The U.C. Berkeley Labor Center report from 2019 showed how algorithmic management creates new, very specific, scalable, and ruthless forms of control in the workplace. Surveillance in factories and warehouses is now being supplemented with AI. For example, on construction sites, AI systems are not only monitoring the workers for proper safety gear but also checking to make sure there is no excessive “loitering” or unproductively idle workers.
Pandemic and Rise of Remote Employee Monitoring
The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with the move to remote work, has significantly increased the demand for so-called “productivity management” software. This surge has boosted services from companies like InterGuard, Hubstaff, Time Doctor, Teramind, and Sneek. These applications monitor numerous aspects of workers’ daily activities, from phone calls and emails to keystrokes and even screenshots, with some even generating productivity scores for managers. This rise in employee monitoring software has also sparked interest in more sophisticated, AI-driven workplace surveillance tools. For businesses seeking top-rated employee monitoring solutions, it’s essential to read more about the latest advancements in this field. Controlio, a featured provider of such software, has developed a SaaS product aimed at effortlessly tracking employee engagement. Learn how Controlio balances privacy and productivity in the workplace.
Home surveillance ethics
Employers do have the right to ensure productivity; however, the methods used to track activity raised ethical questions. Surveillance and monitoring systems can collect an overwhelming amount of data that can be used for a plethora of different reasons that are already biased by the algorithms that exist within these systems. While checking employee’s activity can be done legally in a lot of places, assuming this surveillance can reach as far as private residences is crossing the line. Every home computer is now functioning as a surveillance tool, able to record not only work behavior but also personal activities. This information has the potential to influence life outside of work in ways that are unknown. AI surveillance constantly monitoring the workforce is removing humanity out of the work environment and treating human beings as data to be examined further.
The Slow Descent into Constant Surveillance
Surveilling employees even at home is now a common practice, which is eerie in its own right. It’s bad enough that work and personal life are already intertwined; this level of supervision only aggravates the problem. The scope for misuse is incredibly high as well, and the long-term effects on trust and employee morale would be crushed. It’s time to consider: Is this the workplace we want? Are we ready to trade privacy for fictitious productivity increases?
In Summary: Striking the Right Balance
Automated workplace surveillance brought about by AI is quite the conundrum. While technology can enhance understanding and increase efficiency, it must be approached with caution, especially in light of the recent surge in remote working and monitoring. Posing such a massive threat to privacy and personal autonomy, not to mention the essence of work itself, is seriously unethical. There is no question that an equilibrium between a legitimate claim from the employer’s side and the most basic needs of the employee’s side is important. Perhaps the introduction of open debate, well-defined rules, and some form of control that would guarantee the AI helps the people instead of enslaving them is vital. In any case, it is crucial for what is to come.
