The Floor
Should employers be allowed to monitor what workers do on their computers?
Most large employers already can. The question is whether they should.
Concluded from · Assessed from the stance that consent is what separates supervision from surveillance.
Runs while the room is still moving
1,201 people have taken a position.
Take a position and it opens — to you now, and to everybody when this closes.
The split is covered until you have taken a position, because on a question like this the room is not evidence about the world — it is what is being measured, and a number shown first would only tell you what the normal answer is. It opens to everybody when this closes, answered or not.
What people are weighing
Take a position to mark what weighed with you
- Most monitoring software is installed without a noticeNo, not at all
- Regulated industries are required to keep activity logsYes, it is their equipment
- Workers told in advance report far less resentmentOnly if workers are told
What settles this, and when it closes
This one has no answer. It has a room. Nothing in the world settles it — so when it closes, the floor says what it concludes, from a stated stance.
No closing date has been set. The floor closes it when the room has stopped moving.
What people said · 3
Every bubble carries the side its writer took.
Take a position above to add your view. You can read everyone else’s now.
Peter V.@peter_v· 2 Sept
Nobody argues the company cannot see what happens on the shop floor. A laptop is the shop floor now.
Hana J.@hana_j· 3 Sept
Being told does not make it acceptable, it makes it announced. You cannot consent to something you must accept to be employed.
Jun P.@jun_p· 10 Sept
Told or not told is a distinction the software erases. Once it is installed, nobody remembers the notice they signed on their first day.
