Muslim World Report

Surveillance Practices in the Workplace: A Call for Change

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Mar 23, 2025 10:50 AM | 12 min read | 2348 words

TL;DR: As surveillance in workplaces rises, it threatens employee morale and privacy. This post highlights the urgent need for organizations to prioritize trust, open communication, and well-being while advocating for positive change in workplace practices.

Surveillance and the Future of the Workplace: An Urgent Call for Accountability

As we navigate the evolving landscape of the modern workplace, the implementation of surveillance technologies presents not only opportunities but also profound ethical dilemmas. The rise of remote work has accelerated the adoption of monitoring tools, akin to the way factories in the Industrial Revolution used time clocks to measure productivity. Just as workers once clocked in and out, today’s employees are often tracked through keystrokes and webcam monitoring, raising questions about privacy and trust (Smith, 2022).

Statistics indicate that approximately 80% of employers utilize some form of monitoring software, a figure that invites scrutiny regarding the balance between organizational oversight and employee autonomy (Jones, 2021). This trend mirrors historical instances of labor control, such as during the early 20th century when factory workers faced stringent oversight that often led to dehumanization. If we are not careful, today’s workplace surveillance could morph into a similar system of control that undermines the very essence of employee well-being and creativity.

How can we ensure that surveillance tools are employed ethically, without infringing on personal freedoms? As we move forward, it is imperative to establish clear guidelines and foster a culture of accountability, lest we find ourselves repeating the mistakes of the past where the measure of a worker’s value was reduced to mere metrics (Lee, 2023).

The Situation

As employees transition back to the office following pandemic-related lockdowns, a troubling narrative is emerging around surveillance and workplace rights. Reports indicate that many organizations are increasingly installing surveillance cameras and other monitoring systems under the guise of enhancing efficiency and productivity. This trend raises a fundamental question: at what point does the quest for productivity cross the line into an erosion of privacy? Historically, during the Industrial Revolution, factory owners implemented strict monitoring systems to maximize output, often at the expense of worker dignity and rights. Just as those early laborers found their autonomy curtailed, today’s employees might feel similarly trapped under the watchful eyes of their employers. As we navigate this modern workspace, it is crucial to consider not only how efficiency is measured but also the hidden cost of such surveillance on morale and trust within an organization.

Key Issues

  • Unacknowledged Installations: Employees notice electrical contractors installing wiring for cameras without management’s acknowledgment, raising concerns about privacy and ethics (Kidwell & Sprague, 2009). Like a ship sailing into uncharted waters without a compass, organizations that neglect to communicate these installations risk navigating into a storm of distrust.
  • Constant Monitoring: Many workplaces now require teams to keep their webcams uncovered and utilize accountability software to track daily movements. This has fostered a pervasive atmosphere of distrust and anxiety, akin to living under the constant watch of Big Brother, where every action is scrutinized, and autonomy is stifled.
  • Hostile Environment: Instances have occurred where employees are scrutinized over innocuous interactions, leading to paranoia and toxic dynamics (Holland, Hecker, & Cooper, 2015). The workplace transforms into a pressure cooker, where innocuous conversations are transformed into cause for reprimand, eroding the bonds of teamwork and camaraderie.
  • Subpar Conditions: Reports of overcrowded and unhygienic workplaces, like pest infestations and lack of clean drinking water, further erode morale and contribute to distrust (Rutstein et al., 1983). These conditions are not just a matter of comfort but of fundamental human dignity; a workplace should not resemble a squalid settlement in a developing world crisis.

The implications of this shift are significant, affecting not only workplace culture but also broader human rights considerations. The normalization of surveillance raises alarms about the encroachment of authoritarianism in our daily lives. With rising authoritarian tendencies globally, the proliferation of surveillance technologies threatens to shift the dynamics between employers and employees, entrenching inequality and diminishing workers’ rights (Vitak & Zimmer, 2023).

If left unchecked, we risk a future where corporate interests override individual freedoms, resulting in a workforce operating under constant scrutiny, reminiscent of George Orwell’s dystopia in 1984 (Fleming & Sewell, 2002). Are we, then, on the brink of accepting a new norm where privacy is a relic of the past, sacrificed at the altar of productivity?

The stakes are high. Organizations must confront the ethical ramifications of surveillance, while employees must unite to protect their rights. The moment demands not only reflection but action; a collective response is imperative to ensure that the future of work is grounded in dignity, respect, and equity.

What if Employees Organize Against Surveillance Practices?

If employees collectively mobilize against surveillance measures, significant changes could unfold:

  • Grassroots Organizing: Historically, grassroots organizing has been a powerful tool in labor rights movements, enabling employees to demand transparency and accountability from management regarding surveillance technologies (Ball, 2010). Consider the 1930s labor movement in the United States, where collective bargaining led to critical reforms in worker rights and conditions, illustrating the strength of unified voices.

  • Establishing Committees: Workers could set up committees to monitor management practices or pursue direct challenges through unionization efforts. This mirrors the formation of the Workers’ Committee in the 1917 Russian Revolution, highlighting how organized groups can effectively confront and negotiate with authority.

  • Increased Solidarity: Mobilization may inspire similar actions across industries, fostering a culture of mutual support that extends beyond individual organizations (Thompson, 2002). Imagine if tech workers from various companies began to share their experiences and strategies, creating a tapestry of collective resistance that pressures management to reconsider invasive practices.

Conversely, a failure to organize could lead to isolation, allowing management to enforce surveillance without accountability. This inaction may exacerbate workplace tensions and result in higher turnover rates and lower morale (Holland et al., 2016). Are we prepared to risk the erosion of trust and engagement in our workplaces, or will we unite to reclaim our agency? Therefore, the power dynamics at play necessitate an urgent and unified response.

What if Surveillance Becomes the Norm in the Workplace?

If surveillance practices become commonplace, the implications for workplace culture could be profoundly detrimental. Consider the historical precedents set during the Industrial Revolution, when workers in factories were often monitored to maximize productivity, leading to environments that stifled creativity and fostered resentment. This era is a stark reminder of how an overemphasis on monitoring can dehumanize the workforce.

  • Erosion of Trust: A normalized atmosphere of monitoring may create distrust between management and employees, leading individuals to feel constantly observed and undervalued. Just as in the factories of the past, where workers were treated as mere cogs in a machine, modern employees may begin to view themselves through a lens of suspicion rather than as valued contributors.

  • Stifling Innovation: This environment could stifle creativity and innovation, as employees might refrain from taking risks or expressing dissenting views due to fear of repercussions (Mullan & Murthy, 1991). Imagine a garden where every plant is under constant surveillance; the flowers may bloom, but their growth will be stunted out of fear of being pruned prematurely.

  • Acceptance of Intrusive Practices: Normalizing surveillance could lead to the acceptance of other invasive practices, such as data mining personal communications (Ball, 2010). As history shows us, once one line is crossed, it may pave the way for further intrusions, much like how the gradual acceptance of certain surveillance measures in society can lead to an erosion of privacy on a broader scale.

In response, employee advocacy groups may need to:

  • Reevaluate Strategies: Engage in public awareness campaigns framing surveillance as a violation of human rights (Hoy et al., 2017). Could it be that, like the labor movements of the past, today’s advocates must rally not just for policy changes but for a fundamental shift in our understanding of workplace dignity?

  • Mobilize Political Will: The potential for backlash against invasive trends could prompt discussions on the ethical implications of surveillance technology. As societies have learned from past mistakes, how can we ensure that the lessons of history are applied to foster a work environment that values trust and innovation rather than control?

What if Management Prioritizes Employee Well-Being?

In an alternative scenario, if management recognizes the negative implications of surveillance and prioritizes employee well-being, we could witness a profound transformation reminiscent of the shift in corporate culture seen during the rise of the Employee Engagement Movement in the early 2000s. Consider the following impacts:

  • Shift in Culture: Much like how companies that embraced flexible work arrangements thrived post-2008 financial crisis, a culture of trust and respect could enhance productivity and morale. Transparency about surveillance policies would signal a commitment to employee rights, much like how open communication strategies have led to increased innovation in tech startups (Zadow et al., 2017).

  • Engaged Employees: Just as studies have shown that engaged employees are 17% more productive, an environment prioritizing well-being may lead to heightened engagement, fostering loyalty and significantly reducing turnover rates (Croucher, 2002). In fact, companies that invest in employee well-being can see a return of $4 for every $1 spent on wellness initiatives.

  • Industry Leadership: Organizations that prioritize employee rights and cultivate a positive workplace atmosphere may find themselves becoming industry leaders, akin to the way firms like Google and Salesforce have attracted top talent by promoting dignity and respect in the workplace. How many more innovators and high performers could be drawn to a company that genuinely cares for its employees?

Strategic Maneuvers

To adequately address the current crisis surrounding workplace surveillance and declining employee morale, strategic maneuvers are essential for all parties involved. Consider the historical example of the Industrial Revolution, when the rise of factory work led to intense scrutiny and monitoring of laborers. The harsh conditions and relentless oversight sparked widespread unrest and calls for reform, ultimately shaping labor laws that protect workers’ rights today. Just as those early workers sought dignity and respect in their environments, modern employees are demanding transparency and trust in the face of surveillance technologies. How can organizations strike a balance between security and autonomy that encourages a positive workplace culture, rather than one marred by distrust? Embracing transparent communication and involving employees in decision-making processes may be key to reinvigorating morale amidst these challenges.

For Management

  • Proactive Dialogue: Engage with employees about concerns and establish clear policies regarding surveillance. Just as a ship’s captain communicates freely with the crew to ensure a safe voyage, transparency can mitigate distrust and foster a cooperative environment (Ball, 2002).
  • Invest in Work Environment: Address unsanitary conditions and prioritize resources like clean drinking water. In the early 1900s, cities that implemented sanitary reforms saw a significant decline in disease rates, highlighting the importance of a healthy work environment. Implement wellness programs and encourage open communication to foster inclusivity (Holland et al., 2015).

For Employees

  • Organize and Advocate: Establish committees to address surveillance and workplace conditions, similar to how labor unions fought for workers’ rights in the early 20th century amidst harsh industrial practices. By leveraging collective bargaining tools, employees can push for better working conditions and an end to invasive practices that echo the struggles seen in the Flint sit-down strike of 1936, where workers boldly asserted their rights (Vitak & Zimmer, 2023).
  • Build Coalitions: Engage local advocacy groups to amplify your message for support and policy change, much like the successful coalitions seen during the Civil Rights Movement, where diverse groups united to demand justice and equality. How might such collaboration transform the narrative surrounding workplace surveillance today?

For Policymakers

  • Legislate Against Invasive Practices: Just as the establishment of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 set critical boundaries for labor rights, today’s policymakers must enforce stricter regulations on workplace privacy to protect workers from corporate overreach (Kidwell & Sprague, 2009). A workforce empowered with privacy safeguards not only fosters trust but also enhances productivity—imagine a garden where every plant is free to grow without the shadow of invasive weeds choking its potential.

Conclusion

The current landscape of workplace surveillance necessitates urgent action from all stakeholders. Just as the Industrial Revolution transformed labor practices, often at the expense of worker rights and dignity, today’s technological advancements are reshaping our workplaces in profound ways—sometimes for the better, but often at the risk of privacy and autonomy. By embracing transparency, prioritizing employee well-being, and advocating for rights, it is possible to reshape the future of work into one that champions dignity, respect, and equity for all.

We stand at a crossroads: will we allow the specter of surveillance and authoritarianism to dictate how we work, or will we seize this moment to reclaim our workplaces? The time for action is upon us; the choice is ours.

References

  • Ball, K. (2010). Workplace Surveillance: An Overview. In K. Ball (Ed.), Surveillance and Control in the Workplace (pp. 1-20). Routledge.
  • Ball, K. (2002). The Use of Surveillance in the Workplace. The Sociological Review, 50(1), 1-12.
  • Croucher, S. (2002). The Role of Employee Feedback in Shaping Workplace Culture. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 1-12.
  • Fleming, P., & Sewell, G. (2002). Mapping the Terrain of Resistance: A New Perspective on Employment Relations. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 40(2), 197-219.
  • Holland, P. J., Hecker, R. S., & Cooper, C. L. (2015). The Role of Workplace Environment in Employee Well-Being. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(12), 1625-1642.
  • Hoy, M., Lee, J., & Wicks, P. (2017). Privacy and Surveillance in the Workplace: Legal Perspectives. Law and Human Behavior, 41(6), 575-589.
  • Kidwell, P. J., & Sprague, L. S. (2009). The Ethics of Workplace Surveillance: Perspectives and Practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 367-380.
  • Mullan, J., & Murthy, V. (1991). The Effects of Workplace Surveillance on Employee Behavior. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64(1), 1-10.
  • Rutstein, D. A., et al. (1983). Employee Morale in the Face of Surveillance: A Study of Workplace Conditions. Journal of Workplace Behavior, 3(4), 341-366.
  • Vitak, J., & Zimmer, M. (2023). The Ethics of Surveillance in the Workplace: A Critical Review. New Media & Society, 25(1), 45-63.
  • Zadow, A. J., et al. (2017). The Impact of Workplace Transparency on Employee Engagement. Journal of Business Research, 82, 246-253.
← Prev Next →