周一,，《每日電訊報(bào)》的記者們?cè)谏习鄷r(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn),，公司安裝了個(gè)人傳感器，用于監(jiān)視他們是否在崗,。公司并未提前通知,，也沒(méi)有就這項(xiàng)措施進(jìn)行任何解釋。全體員工的抗議聲迫使公司在當(dāng)天下班時(shí)將這些傳感器拆除,。

二十多年來(lái),，監(jiān)視員工舉動(dòng)一直是工作場(chǎng)所的常態(tài),。如果你登錄計(jì)算機(jī)開(kāi)始工作,，認(rèn)為自己沒(méi)有被跟蹤，那你可就大錯(cuò)特錯(cuò)了,。本特利大學(xué)商業(yè)道德中心的一份調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn),，92%的美國(guó)公司設(shè)有道德行為官員，負(fù)責(zé)監(jiān)控員工的電子郵件賬戶(hù)——這還是2002年的事情,。

美國(guó)工作權(quán)利學(xué)會(huì)的里維斯?莫爾特比表示：“計(jì)算機(jī)監(jiān)控可以追溯到20年前,，而位置監(jiān)控則是最近才出現(xiàn)的?！?/p>

據(jù)Buzzfeed報(bào)道,，《每日電訊報(bào)》告訴員工，安裝傳感器的目的是收集“環(huán)境可持續(xù)性數(shù)據(jù)”,。這確實(shí)是英國(guó)數(shù)據(jù)管理公司Cad-Capture推銷(xiāo)監(jiān)控設(shè)備時(shí)所宣傳的用途之一,。

Cad-Capture是一家利用數(shù)據(jù)幫助客戶(hù)尋找辦公空間的房地產(chǎn)咨詢(xún)公司。在經(jīng)濟(jì)陷入衰退之后,，一些公共部門(mén)客戶(hù)希望降低房地產(chǎn)方面的支出,，以應(yīng)對(duì)政府的緊縮措施。于是,，Cad-Capture就開(kāi)發(fā)了一款名為OccupEye的監(jiān)控設(shè)備,。

Cad-Capture公司高級(jí)客戶(hù)經(jīng)理尼爾?斯蒂爾表示：“他們希望我們公司進(jìn)行房地產(chǎn)使用率研究，以確定他們對(duì)物業(yè)的利用是否有效,?！泵總€(gè)工作空間可以花費(fèi)大約150美元購(gòu)買(mǎi)一臺(tái)OccupEye，也可以租用,，每月租金約為22美元,，這款設(shè)備利用熱傳感器和運(yùn)動(dòng)傳感器確定一個(gè)空間是否有人使用。

斯蒂爾表示,，自2012年上市以來(lái),，OccupEye的銷(xiāo)量便開(kāi)始“呈指數(shù)級(jí)”增長(zhǎng)。2015年，該設(shè)備占到Cad-Capture公司業(yè)務(wù)的50%,。

On Monday, journalists at The Daily Telegraph were welcomed to work by individual sensors that monitored when they were at their desks. The sensors appeared with no notice or explanation and prompted such an outcry from the Telegraph’s staff that the company decided to remove them by the day’s end.

For more than two decades, employee monitoring has been a given in the workplace. If you log into a computer to do your job and think you’re not being tracked, you’re wrong. A survey by the Bentley College Center For Business Ethics found that 92% of American businesses with ethics officers monitor their employees’ email accounts—and that was in 2002.

“Computer monitoring goes back 20 years,” says Lewis Maltby of the National Workrights Institute, “but location monitoring is much more recent.”

The Telegraph told employees that the sensors were installed to collect “environmental sustainability data,” according to Buzzfeed. And that is indeed one of the purposes for which Cad-Capture, a United Kingdom-based data management company, markets its OccupEye monitoring devices.

Cad-Capture is a real estate consultancy that uses data to help clients find office space. Its OccupEye device was developed in the wake of the recession, when Cad-Capture’s public sector clients wanted to reduce their real estate expenses in response to austerity measures.

“They had an interest in having companies like ours conduct real estate utilization studies to determine if they were occupying their property efficiently,” says Neil Steele, a senior account manager at Cad-Capture. The OccupEye device, which costs about $150 per workspace to buy or approximately $22 per month to rent, uses heat and motion sensors to determine if a space is occupied.

Since OccupEye launched in 2012, sales of the devices have grown “exponentially,” Steele says. In 2015, they made up 50% of Cad-Capture’s business.

斯蒂爾表示,，目前有數(shù)萬(wàn)臺(tái)OccupEye設(shè)備為全世界數(shù)百家客戶(hù)服務(wù),。這款設(shè)備可以向管理者實(shí)時(shí)反饋工作場(chǎng)所的使用情況，在采用“辦公桌輪用制”的公司特別受歡迎,。所謂辦公桌輪用制是一種工作空間共享的作法,，員工沒(méi)有固定的工位，而是登記可用的辦公桌,。OccupEye系統(tǒng)可以為雇主和員工提供所有座位的地圖,，并用顏色代碼標(biāo)注無(wú)人使用的座位。大學(xué)也在利用這項(xiàng)技術(shù),，告知學(xué)生們可用的學(xué)習(xí)空間,。

在被問(wèn)及是否有客戶(hù)有意利用這款設(shè)備調(diào)查員工的行蹤或工作效率時(shí)，斯蒂爾回答說(shuō)：“沒(méi)有這樣的客戶(hù),?！彼f(shuō)道：“這是一款空間監(jiān)測(cè)設(shè)備，它不是用來(lái)監(jiān)控人的,?！?/p>

但莫爾特比卻對(duì)各公司使用這款設(shè)備的意圖表示懷疑。他表示：“一項(xiàng)用于提高效率的工作技術(shù)最終淪為紀(jì)律整肅工具的例子不勝枚舉,，這不會(huì)是第一個(gè),。”他問(wèn)道：“如果員工移動(dòng)圖表明,，一名員工離開(kāi)崗位的次數(shù)超過(guò)另外一名員工,，公司會(huì)怎么做？”管理者會(huì)視而不見(jiàn)嗎,？莫爾特比表示：“有些情況下,，公司或許不會(huì)理會(huì)，但并不盡然,?！?/p>

雖然《每日電訊報(bào)》事件招致眾怒，但OccupEye的侵略性其實(shí)遠(yuǎn)低于一些在售的跟蹤設(shè)備,。這款設(shè)備僅監(jiān)控員工是否在工位上,。有些監(jiān)視設(shè)備則會(huì)對(duì)員工進(jìn)行全天候監(jiān)控。對(duì)于莫爾特比等職場(chǎng)權(quán)利倡議者來(lái)說(shuō),，這些設(shè)備更值得擔(dān)憂,。例如,，莫爾特比表示，越來(lái)越多的醫(yī)院利用無(wú)線射頻設(shè)備實(shí)時(shí)跟蹤員工的位置,，監(jiān)視護(hù)士的移動(dòng)情況,。醫(yī)院宣稱(chēng)，這些設(shè)備有助于改進(jìn)護(hù)士的護(hù)理效率,。但莫爾特比認(rèn)為：“他們之所以需要跟蹤每位護(hù)士的一舉一動(dòng),，首先是因?yàn)獒t(yī)院沒(méi)有足夠的護(hù)士?！?/p>

雇主通過(guò)某些工具,，利用工作手機(jī)跟蹤員工的作法，則更令人苦惱,。對(duì)于雇主來(lái)說(shuō),，跟蹤某些員工是有道理的，比如送貨司機(jī),，去見(jiàn)客戶(hù)的銷(xiāo)售人員等,。技術(shù)調(diào)查公司阿伯丁集團(tuán)2012年的一項(xiàng)研究顯示，在設(shè)有這類(lèi)“現(xiàn)場(chǎng)員工”的公司當(dāng)中,，有62%使用GPS進(jìn)行跟蹤，在2008年,，這一比例僅有約30%,。但不論工作日還是周末，不分白天黑夜地跟蹤員工的手機(jī),，勢(shì)必會(huì)引發(fā)一些問(wèn)題,。

這種全天候監(jiān)視方式已經(jīng)讓一些公司惹上官司。一些員工起訴稱(chēng),，這種監(jiān)控造成的隱私問(wèn)題,，“對(duì)于一個(gè)理智的人極具冒犯性?！?/p>

莫爾特比表示,，目前尚沒(méi)有針對(duì)這類(lèi)跟蹤的成文法，但法官可以根據(jù)普通法的隱私標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行裁定,。

在某些情況下,，跟蹤員工位置確實(shí)可以提高效率。例如,，美國(guó)銀行根據(jù)位置和語(yǔ)音跟蹤所收集的數(shù)據(jù),，增加了客服中心員工相互溝通的時(shí)間。

但莫爾特比認(rèn)為,，一般而言,，“一些公司認(rèn)為,，知道員工何時(shí)離開(kāi)工位對(duì)雇主有利，這種觀點(diǎn)其實(shí)并無(wú)直觀的明顯理由,?！彼硎荆S著移動(dòng)技術(shù)的普及,，“你并非只有在工位上才能工作,。假如有一種神奇的設(shè)備可以確定一名員工什么時(shí)候在工作或者沒(méi)有工作，或許還值得為此花一大筆錢(qián),，可惜這樣的設(shè)備并不存在,。”（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：劉進(jìn)龍/汪皓

審校：任文科

Steele says there are tens of thousands of OccupEye units in service at hundreds of clients worldwide. The devices, which provide administrators with a live feed of workplace occupancy, are especially popular among companies that employ “hot desking”—a workspace sharing practice in which employees don’t have a set workstation but log in at any desk that’s available. The OccupEye system can supply employers and their workers with a map of all seats and color code the ones that are free. Universities also use the technology to inform students of open study spaces.

When asked if a client had ever expressed interest in using the devices to survey individual employees’ whereabouts or productivity, Steele answered, “No, none at all.” He said, “It’s all about the space, not about individuals.”

Maltby is skeptical of companies’ intentions. “This wouldn’t be the first employment technology that was introduced for efficiency but became a disciplinary tool,” he says. “What’s going to happen when the traffic pattern shows that one employee is away more than another?” he asks. Is a manager just going to ignore that? “In some cases yes, in some cases no,” Maltby says.

For all the outrage the Telegraph incident prompted, the invasiveness of OccupEye pales in comparison to some of the tracking technology that’s out there. It only monitors whether employees are at their desks. Other types of monitors that follow employees for the entire workday are more concerning to workplace rights advocates like Maltby. For instance, Maltby says hospitals are increasingly using radio frequency identification badges, which constantly track an employee’s location, to monitor the movement of their nurses. Hospitals promote the badges as a way to ensure efficient patient care. But “the reason they need to track every nurse every second of every shift is that there aren’t enough nurses to begin with,” Maltby says.

More upsetting still are the tools employers use to track workers through their work cell phones. It makes sense for employers to track some employees, such as delivery drivers or sales staff who travel to clients. A 2012 study by Aberdeen Group, a technology research firm, reported that 62% of companies with such “field employees” tracked staff using GPS, up from about 30% in 2008. Problems arise, though, when employee cell phones are tracked at all hours, day or night, workday or weekend.

That kind of 24/7 surveillance has led to lawsuits by workers who claim that the privacy implications of such monitoring are “highly offensive to a reasonable person.”

Maltby says that there’s no statutory law against that kind of tracking, but judges could rule against it based on common law privacy standards.

In some instances, employee location tracking can be used to improve productivity. Bank of America, for instance, used the data it collected from location and voice monitors to increase the time its call center employees spent talking to one another.

But in general, Maltby says, “it’s not intuitively obvious why knowing every time an employee leaves [his or her] desk is of use to an employer.” Given the mobile technology available, “you don’t have to be be at your desk to work,” he says. “If there was some magic device that determined when an employee was working or not working, it’d be worth a lot of money, but such a device does not exist.”