Millennium Marketing Research®

Tom Schori DBA Millennium Marketing Research®, 808 Ironwood, Normal IL 61761, 309-532-8466

Starting Page    Millennium Marketing Research?    Types of Research    Principals    Articles   Quote

Some companies sinking to new lows to spy on employees.

By Thomas R. Schori, Ph.D., and Michael L. Garee, Principals,  Millennium Marketing Research, 808 E. Ironwood, Normal, IL 61761-5239. Tel. 309-532-8466 -

Unfortunately, employers spying on employees is nothing new, but some organizations are sinking to new lows to keep an eye (and ear) on employees, according to by Lew Maltby, director of the National Employment Rights office of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Even some Fortune 1000 companies that ought to be spending the overwhelming amount of their time and energy on improving their products and services instead of seeking more technological sophisticated ways of controlling workers, are going to great lengths to keep tabs on employees by installing secret cameras and hidden microphones.

One such company, Northern Telecom, a manufacturer of telecommunications equipment, went so far as to tap pay phones in the employee cafeteria. The company even put "bugs" in the sprinkler system! Printer and computer manufacturing giant Epson secretly read employee’s e-mail¾ despite assurances that such communication would remain confidential.

As if these examples of "Big Brother" aren’t outrageous enough, consider this: A school in Arizona had a hidden camera installed in the principal’s shower. If they can’t trust their own principal, whom can they trust?

What’s going on here? Isn’t such questionable behavior on the part of employer’s illegal, not to even mention immoral and unethical? It probably will come as a surprise to most, but, according to Maltby, virtually all of these activities are legal, based on current law!

Why are employers resorting to spying activities such as these? The short answer is, simply because they can. Employers who are suspicious and mistrustful of their employees are hardly anything new and different, but heretofore installing and maintaining such sophisticated spying tools and systems was far too cost prohibitive for most companies. No longer is that the case, though, because, like the cost of most high-tech electronic items, sophisticated surveillance equipment today can be had for a mere pittance, at least from the perspective of corporate coffers.

Maltby characterizes (correctly, we believe) this new wave of corporate spying as being a short sighted, mean spirited response to the competitive pressures faced by employers.

"To survive and prosper in the new global economy," he says, "American companies have to become more productive and efficient. But instead of meeting this challenge by giving their employees the equipment and training they need to boost their performance and making them real partners in the business, far too many employers cling to the old command-and-control mentality and use surveillance technology to keep employees in line."

Regardless of the excuse used by employers who resort to such shabby tactics, Maltby added that people have the basic human right to go to work without having to wonder if there’s a video camera in the bathroom or a microphone hidden in the office ceiling.

"This is not the former Soviet Union," he said.

As bad as the current situation with spying on employees is, Maltby said we should expect it to get even worse, as more and more employees nowadays are taking to the World Wide Web using company computers. Some employers have already begun to monitor their employees’ access patterns. What’s the potential problem with that?

"An incest survivor or Alcoholics Anonymous member who checks in with their support group over lunch may find that their employer learns all about their most private secrets," he pointed out.

Don’t look for lawmakers to do much to correct these gross corporate abuses, either.

"Our lawmakers have done virtually nothing to protect us from these abuses," he said. "Federal wiretapping laws place some restrictions on employers’ ability to eavesdrop on personal telephone calls, but when it comes to hidden cameras, e-mail monitoring and other forms of surveillance, it’s open season on employees."

We aren’t questioning¾nor do we believe that Maltby is questioning¾an employer’s legitimate right to protect sensitive data and other proprietary information, guard against misuse of company equipment, or take preventative measures against employees conducting extensive personal business on company time. But the companies and organizations specifically cited in this column and in Maltby’s article, as well as the many others that behave in this same scurrilous manner but that have not been named, have without question gone way beyond these boundaries.

Rather than to go into the surveillance business and further alienate good employees in a tight labor market that promises to get a lot tighter as fully qualified workers become harder and harder to come by, companies today would be better advised to spend valuable (and oftentimes limited) corporate resources on far more productive endeavors.