INTHEBLACK February / March 2026 - Magazine - Page 25
WHILE MUCH HAS BEEN REPORTED
about workplaces being more flexible than
ever, far less has been revealed about the
other reality — the fact that we’ve never
been more closely watched. Workforce
surveillance in a post-pandemic world
has made the concept of flexible working
surprisingly inflexible, and governments are
falling behind with regulation.
Professor Alysia Blackham from
Melbourne Law School at the University
of Melbourne discusses several case studies
in her paper on surveillance and data privacy
at work. Employees at a major bank, she
reports, have to download an app to perform
standard workplace tasks such as enter
buildings and book workstations. At all
times, whether they are actively using the
app or not, their location data is collected.
“As one Google user noted in 2018:
‘I’m really uncomfortable with the idea
that this application requires 24/7 access
to my location. A major privacy concern
in my opinion’,” Blackham writes.
“The app is being used to track staff
movements,” she continues, “and human
resources are forcing workers to apply
for leave when they appear ‘unproductive’
or are absent from their allocated
workstation.
“Collecting and relying on this data,
including for performance processes,
is therefore highly problematic, as it is
potentially an invasion of employee privacy,
and likely inaccurate.”
Workforce surveillance can take countless
other forms. Technology from organisations
such as Seeing Machines monitors truck
drivers’ faces throughout journeys to warn
them when they’re distracted or becoming
drowsy. Insurer IAG used keystroke logging
in the termination of the employment
of a long-time staff member, with the
ex-employee unsuccessful in an attempt
to have the dismissal overturned.
Software such as Teramind and Hubstaff
are increasingly being used as monitoring
tools behind the scenes.
intheblack.cpaaustralia.com.au 25
