Monitoring remote employees: a follow-up to productivity or a violation of privacy?

Many companies today, after imposing home quarantine and working remotely in several countries of the world as a result of the spread of the Corona pandemic, are afraid of the poor productivity of their employees and workers, so some of them resorted to using various monitoring tools, which workers considered a violation of their privacy.

After the closure and home stone were imposed in several countries of the world as a result of the outbreak of the Corona pandemic, and then many employees and workers had to carry out their work and perform their tasks remotely, employers expressed their fears in the meantime about the decline in productivity, and thus monitoring the performance of employees for their tasks became an obsession worrying owners these companies.

Some of them have benefited from the technological development and the digital boom, which has provided them with modern and advanced technologies that make it easier for them to monitor workers throughout the working period and inspect the level of performance.

Like other technologies in various other sectors that have deviated from their basic uses, remote worker monitoring techniques have become a tool for spying on employees and violating their privacy, as many of them confirmed.

The spread of remote worker monitoring techniques

One of the most prominent challenges faced by the owners of companies and institutions after the decision to close and impose home quarantine, is to ensure the efficiency and productivity of employees while working remotely, as it was before while working from the office.

This concern, along with sometimes intense concern over the security of corporate data, has prompted many employers to use sophisticated technologies and cameras to monitor employees.

The use of these technologies has become very common during the recent period, and there have been many reports that thousands of companies are using monitoring programs to record employees' browsing operations on various Internet pages, and to measure actual working hours. Some of them sense the movements of the keyboard or the "mouse or mouse" device to make sure that the employee is on the job and how active he is in performing the tasks.

In addition to these technologies, some companies have imposed cameras always on to monitor employees and ensure their attendance during working hours. In light of this, she called on many unions, including the British trade unions, to criminalize the use of cameras during remote work, except in cases of work calls and meetings for employees.

A poll conducted by "Prospect" revealed that the proportion of domestic workers in Britain who are being monitored today by companies has risen to 32%. While it is about 48% for workers between the ages of 18 and 34 years.

In France, the National Committee for Informatics and Liberties (Cnil) reported on the illegal use of monitoring software for remote employees, and reported that many complained that they felt constantly and excessively monitored even after the end of the working period.

In the same context, many employees complained that surveillance technologies, especially the cameras that remain on for long periods of time, have become allowing employers to obtain a permanent window into their homes, thus placing great pressure on them and family members who, in turn, have to adapt to these technologies.

Experts and specialists have said that this excessive use of monitoring techniques, some of which are used without the knowledge or knowledge of employees, may also slip into illegal uses, such as accessing and extracting private data of employees for multiple uses, spying on what they write on the platforms and their electronic correspondence, and others.

Monitoring the best solution to ensure productivity?

While human rights complaints escalate about the violation of privacy committed by employers, whether intentionally or unintentionally, by using surveillance technologies and cameras. Companies owners consider that monitoring techniques are initially aimed at protecting corporate data, enhancing productivity and ensuring a secluded and quiet work environment, and achieving communication between employees even under quarantine and closure conditions.

Experts and specialists stress the need to notify company owners and managers, employees of the use of monitoring techniques at the outset. On the other hand, human rights defenders criminalize the excessive use of cameras, and consider that they are supposed to be allowed to be used during private meetings between employees only.

Even if company owners claim that surveillance technologies, especially cameras, are a tool for motivation, some employees see it as a very crude and inhuman way of trying to ensure that people behave the way the company wants, and that it does not in fact replace direct human contact.