1

Stacy Kirchner
CST 300
October 11, 2022
Supervision of Remote Employees
With the increase of remote work, there has also been an increase of employee

surveillance, making many people question if surveillance should be accepted. During the stay-

at-home orders during Covid-19, there was a dramatic shift of workers working in a physical

office to workers working remotely from their homes. As employers were adjusting to this new

work format, many employers implemented new ways to supervise their employees who they

were no longer able to monitor in person. Some employers decided to have their employees have

software on their computers that allowed their work habits to be monitored. While some

employers took more dramatic procedures of requiring their employees to have a video camera

and microphone on while they work. This form of surveillance is considered useful because it

allows for productivity to be tracked and monitored. As many employers have chosen to stay

remote or shift to a hybrid model, some of these employers have also decided to keep these

surveillance methods.

Even before Covid-19, employers were already beginning to surveillance their

employees. There are many different forms of surveillance an employer can use. Software that

allows productivity to be tracked and monitored is known as tattleware. Some examples of how

tattleware is used are screen-recording, counting how many clicks a mouse performs, counting

how many keystrokes are made, and analytical reports for various duties of a job. These practices

that were previously used in the office are now being used in an employee’s home.

As work surveillance is becoming more common, there are many issues being raised.

There are currently not many laws preventing an employer from spying on their employees

(Abril, Harwell, 2021). However, there is debate on what the future legality of this issue should
 2

be. There is also the question of whether this practice invades a person’s privacy right or not.

Even if employers have every right to surveillance their employees, many people question if they

should, because it can create a hostile work environment.

Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder 1: Employers

When it comes to the workplace employers value production and profit. There is a fear of

loss when employees are working remotely (Kurkowski, 2021). There is a strong desire to know

what employees are doing when they are working. Employers want to ensure that their

employees are being productive (Blum, 2022). If employees are not doing their job, it can cause

problems for the company, because it can prevent the company from being profitable and

successful. Even if one employee is not doing their job, it can prevent their coworkers from

doing their job, because many jobs require teamwork. Companies also believe they have the right

to monitor their employees’ activities, on employer-provided devices (Filabi, Hurley, 2019).

Monitoring screens can also prevent security breaches because it deters employees from

engaging in risky online activity. Many companies usually have work from home policies that

state their right to monitor employees. Often, an employee may have to sign an agreement that

they are consenting to this policy. Managers may also feel that this new form of employee

monitoring is just an extension of the previous monitoring they did in the office (Blum, 2022).

Employers may also feel this practice is acceptable because they are legally allowed to monitor

their employees.

Employers use claims of policy to defend why they are monitoring their employees.

There are either policies in place, or should be in place, at companies that ensure employees are

being effective at their job. For a company to be successful, the company needs employees who
 3

are willing to make the company succeed. Policies allow employers to inform their employees of

what is expected of them. When an employer has a monitoring policy, the policy allows the

employer to know that there is an expectation for workers to perform their job duties. A policy

keeps an employee accountable to stay focused on their work. By implementing these policies,

employees are reminded of their goal at work, which is to perform their duties. Having these

types of policies benefit everyone in the company because it keeps the company successful,

which allows the employees to stay employed. An employer sees these practices as being helpful

for both the employer and employees because they ensure that every person in the team is doing

their part.

Stakeholder 2: Employees

Employees in the United States value privacy and trust, especially from their employers.

Remote work allows employees to work from the comfort of their home, but they believe that

comfort should not be violated by intrusive monitoring practices. Having an employee under

video surveillance can record moments when the employee feels they are alone and in the

privacy of their own home. These private moments should not be recorded and make employees

feel like they do not have any privacy. Employees also feel they deserve to have their employer’s

trust, which is not given when they feel their every move is being watched.

Employees use claims of value to justify why their employers should not monitor their

employees. When something goes against a person’s value it is considered unethical. Employees

value their privacy and by not allowing an employee to have privacy they feel that is immoral.

Not having privacy makes it more difficult for employees to perform their jobs, because they feel

their private moments are being violated. Not only are the employees’ values being violated, but

anyone in the view of the camera can feel as if their privacy is being violated. When employers
 4

decide to record their employees from their homes, it is not just the employee that is being

recorded but anything or anyone in the background of the view of the camera (Hunter, 2021).

Not everything being recorded pertains to work, which makes employees feel it is unreasonable

to record them. Although, it is currently not illegal, there is a desire and push to create federal

laws that would require employers to state what data they would collect and why (Blum, 2022).

However, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) still does prevent

employees from unlawful labor practices if privacy laws are being violated (The Pros and Cons

of Remote Employee Surveillance, 2022).

Employees also value trust from their employers, but do not receive this trust when their

employers decide to monitor them. The lack of trust makes employees feel as if they are doing

something wrong, even if they are just doing their job. It can make it hard to concentrate if

employees are distracted by knowing there is a camera on them the entire time they are working

(Abril, Harwell, 2021). Employees are not always aware they are being monitored, which can

break any trust an employee has in their employer if they are surprised by that knowledge. One

employee quit his job after learning that his personal conversations with his family at home were

being recorded without his knowledge (Abril, Harwell, 2021). Doing something without a

person’s knowledge can easily lead to distrust.

Argument Question:

Should employers be allowed to surveillance their remote employees?

Arguments

Stakeholder 1: Employers

Employers justify their actions as ethical by using a cultural relativism framework.

Cultural relativism uses the point of view of a culture to avoid making hasty judgments (Worthy,
 5

2020). Cultural relativism counters ethnocentrisms by trying to understand a different culture

than one’s own culture (Worthy, 2020). Businesses belong to the work culture, which is a culture

that values production. If someone is looking at the situation outside of this cultural viewpoint,

they might not understand how production is a top priority. From a work culture perspective, it is

ethical to ensure production is kept high, no matter what the means to carry that out may be.

There is also an understanding in the work culture that employers can dictate what their

employees do while they are on the company’s time. People may be used to having the freedom

to do anything they want to do, but in the work culture there is an expectation to abide by their

employer’s rules and regulations. In work culture, employees give up some of their freedom

when they are on company’s time.

If employers are not monitoring their employees, there is no understanding of what their

employees are doing while working. There is a fear from managers that employees are wasting

time while they are working. Employers can lose profits when their employees are not being

productive. Surveillance allows employers to manage their employees by ensuring they are

actively working. Employers believe it is beneficial if they are aware of all the work their

employees are doing. This careful observation can also inform an employer if an employee is

struggling in an area. By knowing what employees are doing, there is a way to check that time is

being used as efficiently as possible.

Stakeholder 2: Employees

Employees can justify their position using Kant’s ethics framework. Immanuel Kant

argued that being moral requires acting in a way that can be considered a universal law (Wilburn,

n.d.). A universal law is something that everyone abides by. According to Kant’s ethics

framework, it is unethical for a person to make another person do something they would not do
 6

themselves. Managers are also employees, and they would not want to be closely monitored by

their superiors the way they monitor their own employees (Abril, Harwell, 2021). Those who

surveillance their employees do not want to be surveillance themselves, but still do so. This is

considered unethical because employers have standards for their employees that they do not have

for themselves.

By implementing policies that are considered unethical, employees lose respect for their

employers. Although employers may have implemented some of these practices to make a more

engaging workplace, these practices tend to create distrust (Filabi, Hurley, 2019). Not only does

it create distrust, but it also actually leads to disengagement and less productivity. (Filabi,

Hurley, 2019). These practices make employees not want to perform for employers who they

see as unethical. Some employees even decide to quit their jobs when their employers decide to

engage in this unethical behavior. When employees decide they will not work under unethical

treatment, they lose their job and possibly the means to provide for themselves and others.

Student’s Position

If an employer is willing to let their jobs be remote, there needs to be trust between the

employer and employee. An employee deserves to have trust from their employer because it

shows they are respected. An employer can implement monitoring policies, but employees can

also find ways to work around these monitoring practices; like setting up software that mimics

clicking to prevent it from appearing as if an employee is idling. Not having trust in the employer

can lead to employees not wanting to do their job as efficiently as they are capable of. It also can

create stress since an employee feels that every detail of the way they are doing their job is being

scrutinized. When anyone is constantly being watched, they are unable to relax and think clearly.

People should be able to do their job without having to constantly worry about every task they
 7

perform. A hostile work environment can also lead to a high turnover rate. If an employer is

constantly replacing their employees because no one will agree with their practices, this does not

benefit the company.

Instead of closely monitoring employees in hopes that it will increase production,

companies should provide a comfortable work environment that allows their employees to thrive.

When employees are given more freedom and trust, there is less stress, and they can do their job

more efficiently. If employers feel that the need to monitor their employees closely while they

are working, then they should not give the option for employees to work remotely. Surveillance

will not lead to the productive results employers want to achieve so it should not be performed.
 8

References
Abril, D., Harwell, D. (2021, September 24). Keystroke Tracking, Screenshots, And Facial
Recognition: The Boss May Be Watching Long After the Pandemic Ends. The
Washington Post. Retrieved from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/24/remote-work-from-home
-surveillance/

Blum, S. (2022, January 1). Employee Surveillance Is Exploding with Remote Work and Could
Be the New Norm. HR Brew. Retrieved from https://www.hr-
brew.com/stories/2022/01/19/employee-surveillance-is-exploding-with-remote-work-
and-could-be-the-new-norm/

Filabi, A., Hurley, R. (2019, February 18). The Paradox of Employee Surveillance. Behavioral
Scientist. Retrieved from https://behavioralscientist.org/the-paradox-of-
employee- surveillance/

Hunter, T. (2021, September 24). Here Are All the Ways Your Boss Can Legally Monitor You.
The Washington Post. Retrieved from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/20/work-from-home-computer-
monitoring/

Kurkowski, H. (2021, December 8). Monitoring Remote Workers: The Good, The Bad and The
Ugly. Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2021/12/08/monitoring-remote-
workers-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/?sh=d2873e51da88

The Pros and Cons of Remote Employee Surveillance. (2022, April 12) Zenefits. Retrieved from
https://www.zenefits.com/workest/the-pros-and-cons-of-remote-employee-
surveillance/

Wilburn, H. (2022, August 12) An Introduction to Kant’s Moral Theory. Philosophical Thought.
Retrieved from https://open.library.okstate.edu/introphilosophy/chapter/a-brief-
overview-of-kants-moral-theory/

Worthy, L. D. (2020, July 27). Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism – Culture and Psychology.
Pressbooks. Retrieved from
https://open.maricopa.edu/culturepsychology/chapter/ethnocentrism-and-cultural-
relativism/