Spy v Spy
-
Spy v Spy
Recently I linked to a blog entry in an editorial and got a few email complaints. I was a little surprised at the chastising I took for linking to some inappropriate content. It was a development blog, so I was confused until someone pointed out the problem.
I discovered that the comments section at the bottom of the blog was full of links to various porn, gambling, and other online enterprises that might not be considered acceptable content in the business world. I'd never seen these since I'd picked up the blog entry from the front page and copied the permalink for my editorial. I pinged the author to let him know and apologized to the complainers.
I was annoyed at first, but I realized there was a valid complaint. With today's spying bosses, who knows what might someone might be explaining. Especially if you're a consultant and you're at a client site when my editorial trips a filter.
I've written a few times on employers filtering, censoring, or monitoring employees' work. I've never been thrilled with the practice, but I understand it. In addition to simple proxy filtering, firewalls, and keystroke loggers, employers can now use cameras and other surveillance systems to watch employees. And access them from anywhere in the world.
It's a fine line to walk. Employers have a right to get a good day's work from you, not have their systems compromised with a virus, and ensure compliance with any regulations required of the company. Technology can help here and there's a valid need to enforce some rules since some people will not abide by them.
On the other hand, today's knowledge workers need some flexibility to handle personal matters at work. As long as employers demand after-hours work, weekend work, and other intrusions away from the office, they should be flexible enough to allow a worker to talk to the bank, arrange for a loan, or plan their child's birthday.
It's a balance that needs to be maintained between both parties. Employees need to not abuse their privileges and employers need to be flexible. And both sides should do so openly, disclosing their needs and intentions and working together to solve any issues.
Steve Jones
-
Hi Steve
I couldn't agree more. I don't understand why anyone would chastice you, though. I mean, spamming on blogs is a known issue, and I wouldn't complain to the linker, but rather the one who has an insecure blog that can be spammed.
Perhaps it's because I'm scandinavian, but I really don't see the problem. I assume it's IT professionals who complained, and if they are competent, they would hardly click on "hardcoreXXX.ru" or something like that
/Kim
-
You are assuming that "competent" includes ethics? (and common sense)
A depressingly large percentage of "professionals" I know, who deliver well on what they are paid for, seem to lack either one or both of the above.
Peter
-
Great editorial Steve - thanks for sharing.
I've always told my employers "If you're watching over where I browse and what I do, please don't ever tell me."
I see managerial abuse of this sort as a self-correcting problem. These companies are probably watching their employees because of the high turnover rate... ("the beatings will continue until morale improves")
Seriously though, I believe there are jobs that fit some people better than others - and I also hold there are people who fit jobs better than others.
If you're in a position where you're being watched over more than you like, I encourage you to search for another position. You're not happy, and happy people don't perform to their potential. Plus life is too short to work where you're not happy.
:{> Andy
Andy Leonard, Chief Data Engineer, Enterprise Data & Analytics
-
A big pet peeve of mine is the screwy legal structure that requires this. Employers have a fear of being sued successfully because someone decides to be offended at what someone else does (at most the person doing the offending should be liable, as an individual). We are driven by an overlawyered lawsuit happy envirnment. (This is not to say that people should be doing dodgy stuff at work, and indeed employers would be wise to place limits ... but lawsuits should not be the issue).
Alas I wind up being the one here responsible for maintaining the brain dead filtering system which is constantly getting in the way of legitimate, as well as harmless personal, activities.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
-
I don't think it will affect us too much. Any IT person worth his or her salt will know that the computer goings on across the internet are under a constant threat of monitoring. It is only the uninitiated (can you think of a recent US Congressman) who think what they do on a computer is unrecordable or ephermeral. If an IT person is doing something they aren't supposed to be doing, they need to be fired for sheer stupidity rather than doing what they aren't supposed to be doing.
-
Policies need to be explicit and written.
At the same time, I've stopped worrying if while searching for work related stuff - or even reasonable personal use from work - some kind of inappropriate content is returned.
Just as only the naive can think nothing is recorded, also only the naive can beleive that an employee doing legitimate work on the net will never end up with inappropriate content on the screen. Nevermind the search was for "Error 231042: SQL Server is Mightily Annoyed but Is Being Reticent About the Actual Issue" - somewhere you're likely to have "Nakid Rodents Partying With Oddly Shaped Devices!" come up somewhere in the results.
Roger L Reid
-
"Employers have a right to get a good day's work from you"
Er... no. Bodies corporate have no rights under law, at least to my knowledge - if anyone knows different, I'd appreciate the correction. Instead, employers and employees have the ability to *negotiate* appropriate pay, conditions and work. Sometimes this works by the two parties simply talking, sometimes grievance and disciplinary procedures need to be invoked. But I have no right (as an employee) to employment, and the company that employs me has no right to my effort; there is merely a contract of employment, and that is a very different thing.
I agree with the conclusion of the editorial: it *is* a balance, and one where different countries have chosen to strike the balance in different places. For example, it is far more difficult to sack someone in the EU than in the USA - a fact some hire-and-fire US managers have only come to appreciate *after* an employee has dragged their hide through the court system. I also agree that the ideal case is that both sides should be open and work together. I only wish that happened more often in reality!
- Peter
-
I agree.
I was self-employed for 14 years, never keeping careful track of my time. I discovered when I became an employee that in my self-employment days I'd only been working 30-hour work-weeks, not the 40 I imagined. I now track my own time with a single database table and a few stored procedures so that I don't under-serve my employer (with whom I have contracted for ~40 hours weekly), nor do I give them more than I want to.
I was the one who made and who maintains this system; my boss doesn't care. For me it's a matter of fulfilling my word to serve, and to maintain balance; I want to do personal stuff whenever I need to and when it doesn't impinge upon my work-effort. This way I get all my hours in, and I get to interupt my day for personal stuff in a way that works very well for me.
--Jonathon Storm
-
I work for a very large company. I am a full time telecommuter and although I am salaried, I must record my hours in the time keeping system and get paid for the hours I work. The negative is, time plus $6.50 for overtime.
That being said, the extra $6.50 doesn't mean enough to me to work any OT. I work when I work and never miss a deadline. I get above average on all my quarterly reviews and management stated in a meeting once that as long as we made deadline, they didn't care if we took a half hour out of our morning to drive the kids to school or what ever. We flex our time, some days it is 14 or more hours of coding, other days, it is 8 hours working on the yard or honey do list. In the end, I charge for a 40 hour week and it balances out. Management likes it that way as do we all.
I remember times where I put down a 40 hour week, Monday through Friday but held an email conversation with my manager and two other coworkers at 10pm Sunday night. Never been questioned about the lack of OT on my time submissions. I've also never been chastised when the boss calls and I reply with, "I'll get right on that as soon as I get home. I'm out at Home Depot picking up..."
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply