To what end?
Employers believe otherwise.
And, that justifies home surveillance?
It must suck to have a job like that. I wont work at a job that micro manages you. With the technology we have today there is no reason not to treat people like professionals.
If you are referring to the last video, the CNN video. It is different from the other two.
But it tells us that the government spies on us under the name of protecting America. But in response, we will say, "Yeah, yeah, protect us", but without thinking that the government can turn on its own. But the first and second amendments was to prevent the government from turning on its citizens. And the 4th amendment was to prevent the government from invading our privacy unless there are probable cause.
The Patriot Act which it was given that name to appease the public so that it will not anger the public when they finds out the government can spy on them.
The Patriot Act gives the government permission to those they believe, but not the public, as a national threat. like for an example, if the government before Pres. Trump became president, thinks he is a Russian agent. That it will give them the right to spy on him, or if he belongs to what they considers as a Hate group. That they can spy on him.
That is why they have labeled him a Russian agent and a member to a Hate group. So that the government can spy on him and anyone who affiliate to him like his supporters.
COINTELPRO
COINTELPRO The FBI began COINTELPRO—short for Counterintelligence Program—in 1956 to disrupt the activities of the Communist Party of the United States. In the 1960s, it was expanded to include a number of other domestic groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Socialist Workers Party, and the...vault.fbi.gov
Obama signs hate crimes bill into law - CNN.com
President Obama on Wednesday signed a law that makes it a federal crime to assault an individual because of his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.www.cnn.com
She was considered as a threat to national security because she protested against chemtrails and tried to impeach Bush..
There is software that can monitor and/or record the end-user's activity. In fact in almost every company that I've worked in the last decade or so, we had to acknowledge that we're aware that our activities on the computer are monitored and by continuing, you're giving consent to be monitored. You additionally acknowledge you have no expectation of privacy while on your employer's computer, network, equipment, etc.
If you can take calls and handle them competently while you're doing the laundry or baking bread, what's the problem? Is it more important that the worker be always doing approved activities or that the worker get the job done within acceptable guidelines?
We have seen children and families get in trouble for having a BB gun visible behind the student in distance learning, so the precedent is set. That being said, it would likely come down to whether or not that camera feed would ever be visible by another employee. If so, then it would be an HR issue as a hostile work environment. If visible by a customer, absolutely they would get in trouble.
The main thing is: the government needs to get involved! Always.
I'm working from home, if they require a camera it's not my home anymore
The key is that you are WORKING from home. The company can make the case that they are responsible for where you are working. Think of it this way. If you are on the clock answering phones and you spin around too fast in your chair, fall out of your chair and smack your head on the corner of your desk, who is responsible for your ER bill to get stitches? If you expect the company to pay the bill, where you work is no longer just your home, it is your office and they can dictate what's in it. I was working at Circuit City when working from home first became a possibility for IT personnel. In order to get permission to work from home, you had to show that you had a fully outfitted office with a door and you were not allowed to take care of children while you were working. Things have relaxed since then, but the matter of worker's comp is still an issue. If you insist it's your home and not your office, then you would need to assume responsibility for injuries suffered while on the job.
Yep. It's the same basic scenario. People try to claim that employers are "forcing" these things on employees, but they're not. Employment is voluntary. All you have to say is, "no".
Exactly where my mind went -can’t they track how much work they’re doing at home on the clock, just as you mentioned with tickets or if not they need to come up with a similar tracking system. There should be another solution without requiring cameras.
www.theguardian.com
I have been working in call centers for many years, and working from home started some time ago as incentive for top performers, saving gas and having to drive, etc. Measuring at home performance has always been easy because of existing technology.....you know when person logs in and signs on, when they are on a call and when not, how long each call takes, recordings of each call, and so on. And each CSR has to meet specific KPIs. You don't need cameras when you can track screen movements already. If someone was goofing off they would miss meeting their KPIs.
