EMPLOYEE

MONITORING
PREPARED BY:
ARYA PUTHENVEETTIL
2117017
WHAT IS EMPLOYEE MONITORING?

Employee monitoring is a form of workplace surveillance where employers collect data regarding
their employees’ computer usage, location, and productivity. It is an empowering way to improve
workforce productivity by providing greater insight into not only when employees are working, but
how they are working.
 ● Internet and Email

TYPES OF ● Computer Activities

MONITORING ● Keylogging
● Telephone
● GPS Tracking

● Video Surveillance
 ● Evaluate remote workforce performance

WHY ● Proactively detect insider threats

EMPLOYEE ● Increase team productivity

MONITORING?
● Ensure quality customer service

● Prohibit access to harmful websites

WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS ?
PROS: CONS:

● ● Employee privacy concerns.

Improved employee productivity.
● Increased employee engagement and retention. ● Lack of employee trust.

● Increased revenue. ● Increased Stress Level.

● Reduced operational compliance risk.

ETHICAL APPROACH TO EMPLOYEE
MONITORING
➔ Transparency

➔ Avoid too much monitoring

➔ Never monitor selectively

➔ Being mindful of the data being collected

➔ Use the collected data fairly

EMPLOYEES RIGHT TO PRIVACY
( things employers need to be aware of)
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2000

1. OBLIGATION OF EMPLOYER UNDER THE RULE

● Certain obligations come into play in relation to SPDI and an employer should be aware of such obligations and the
liabilities arising from a failure to comply.
● The Rules require every company to have in place such information security practices, standards, programmes and policies
that are commensurate with the information assets being protected. (Sec 43A)
● In the event of negligence by employer in following the rules- resulting in wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any person-
employer will be liable to pay compensation to the aggrieved employee.(can be up to INR 5 crores (approximately))
● The Rules also set out that International Standards IS / ISO / IEC 27001 is one such standard which could be
implemented by a body corporate.(international standard on how to manage information security, published
jointly by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) in 2005 and then revised in 2013.)

● If any industry association, etc. are following standards other than IS / ISO / IEC 27001 for data protection, they
would need to get their codes approved and notified by the Central Government.

● corporate who have implemented the standards or codes need to get them certified or audited by independent
auditors approved by the Central Government.
2. COMPLIANCE RELATING TO SPDI AND WHEN IS EMPLOYEE CONSENT
REQUIRED?

● Connection to the Business

● Written Consent
● Right to Review, Modify and/or Withdraw Consent
● Consent for Disclosure
Research findings of “Comparitech”:
5 Countries with extreme (worst) surveillance
measures were:
1. CHINA 6/50
2. PAKISTAN 7/50
3. VIETNAM 7/50
4. INDONESIA 9/50
5. IRAQ 11/50

*India was ranked 8th as per the study with a

score of 15/50*
While the best scorers or countries with the best employee monitoring practises were:
1. AUSTRIA
2. FRANCE
3. SWEEDEN

* The top 13 best scorers in the study are all within Europe.*
 EMPLOYEE MONITORING COURT CASE
(BOURKE v. NISSAN)
● In 1990 an employee (Lori Eaton) of Nissan was conducting a training session demonstrating the use of their email
system.
● Lori Eaton randomly selected an email to show how it worked, and the Email that was viewed was of an employee
named Bourke. This email contained personal, sexual nature dialogue and not business related.
● Eaton Reported the Incident to her supervisor who then with managements authorization reviewed the Email
messages for the entire workgroup. Nissan found a substantial amount of emails that contained many sexual
messages between Bourke and Hall.
● Nissan issued warnings for use of its computer systems for personal use. Bourke was eventually fired

● Bourke sued Nissan Corporation on the following grounds:

a. Common Law Invasion of Privacy

b. Violation of Constitutional Right to Privacy

c. Violation of Criminal wiretapping and

eavesdropping statutes

d. Wrongful Discharge in violation of public policy

● The court ruled in favor of Nissan Motor Corporation based on the ground that the plaintiffs had no reasonable
expectations to privacy in their E-mail messages being sent on the company’s network and computers.
References
● https://www.activtrak.com/solutions/employee-monitoring/what-is/
● https://www.currentware.com/blog/what-is-employee-monitoring/
● https://www.newindianexpress.com/business/marketing/2021/feb/18/is-employee-monitoring-per
mitted-in-india-2265776.html
● https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/topics/what-is-employee-monitoring/
● https://itsecuritycentral.teramind.co/2018/02/09/why-do-employers-monitor-workers-reasons-ben
efits-and-statistics/
● https://empmonitor.com/blog/workplace-monitoring-laws-of-different-countries/
● https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/right-to-privacy-we-take-a-closer-look-at-employer-
employee-safeguards-in-india-4015201.html
● https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/employee-monitoring-statistics/