Slashdot Mirror


Cell Tracking on the Rise

An anonymous reader writes "ZDNet is reporting that with the recent advances in cell phone tracking tech more and more companies are using it to keep track of their employee's movements. From the article: 'The gains, say the converted, are many, ranging from knowing whether workers have been "held up" in the pub rather than in a traffic jam, to being able to quickly locate staff and reroute them if necessary. Not everybody is happy about being monitored, however, and civil rights group Liberty says the growth of tracking raises data privacy concerns.'"

9 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Just because you have a mobile doesn't mean by Biotech9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because you have a mobile doesn't mean that it has to be turned on.

    I'd gotten very used to always having a mobile on, being able to be contacted anywhere and at anytime. But I got rid of my mobile 3 years ago and haven't bothered getting a replacement, and it's been very refreshing to have to make appointments to meet people and so on.

    More realistically, if you have your own mobile, you can leave it on and have it with you 24/7. But a mobile from your job should be set to turn on at 9 and off at 5, if those are your hours. I'm shocked by how many people I work with allow their bosses to make them work outside of office hours by ringing them up and getting them to do errands in their own spare time. It's bad enough with European companies slowly moving towards the American model of unpaid lunch breaks that aren't even 30 minutes long, without also copying the 24/7 worker ethic.

    1. Re:Just because you have a mobile doesn't mean by Eivind · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But even that ain't ok. I expect a certain level of trust in me from my employer -- there's really no alternative to this anyway because *any* employee can screw the employer over (atleast somewhat) if he wants to anyway.

      An employer who is not willing to take my word for, for example, that it took 20 minutes longer from the airport back to work today than it does on the average is an employer I have no wish to work for. End of discussion.

  2. Re:Of course i'd complain by shotgunefx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's one thing for the police to locate you, it's another for employers to do so.

    I'm not concerned with people getting busted for doing things on work time that they should not, but it's the precedent it sets.

    --

    -William Shatner can be neither created nor destroyed.
  3. The problem is.. by Sir+Pallas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That (more and more) companies think they own employees, rather than that they pay for their time. If someone never shows up to work on one time or has bad performance reviews, that's one thing; and if it gets bad, let them go. But where that employee is and what that employee does (when not working) is normally not the company's business. Not that any of this is a new idea on their part --- think company towns or migrant worker camps --- but technology now is making the "dream" a possibility, though hopefully not a reality.

  4. July Bombings? by Chris+Kamel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFA:
    There is increasing awareness about the importance of knowing where your staff are in case of incidents like the July London bombings.

    So what good exactly is businesses tracking employees on an incident like that?
    The range of things you can justify in fear of terrorist attacks never stops widening.

    --
    The following statement is true
    The preceding statement is false
  5. Re:Of course i'd complain by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good, then let's install cameras throughout your house, bedrooms and bathrooms too. If you've got nothing to hide, you won't object. The cameras will make sure you aren't a pedophile with kidnapped children hidden in your house.

    If you object, clearly you are guilty since you said you wouldn't object if you had nothing to hide.

    Of course in keeping with the story, not only would the police have access to the cameras but your employer and coworkers as well.

  6. lame excuses by layer3switch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "An employee has to consent to having their mobile tracked. A company can't request to track a phone without the user knowing,"

    WTF? So if I DON'T consent, of course, on my annual employee's review, I won't be marked down with "TEAM PLAYER: -1" Riiiight....

    "Some businesses want to keep an eye on their staff. Some feel they have an obligation to know where staff are in case of emergencies,... There is increasing awareness about the importance of knowing where your staff are in case of incidents like the July London bombings."

    Huh? It's nice to know employers care about well being of emplyees, but seriously, what business of employer to track employees when something like "train bombing" occurs instead that of police? If that is the case, then health benifit and life insurance shouldn't be optional, but mandatory at work. Other wise, what does that really say? "We really care about your safty, but not really so much that we have to pay for your medicals."

    "Knowing where your nearest employee is to a customer is also important. It allows a company to improve efficiency."

    What? Any profession which requires (in my opinion) radio contact at all time may be useful in this case (such as EMT, police, fire fighters, cab drivers, doctors, field techicians, etc), but to improve efficiency on already shrunk-to-death workforce such as IT and sales (with high turnover)? Exactly how will that improve efficiency?

    Jim the employer: Tom, I know you are by 3rd St. Get over to 5th and 7th, the nearest customer site ASAP.
    Tom the employee: Jim, if you know where I am, you should know that I'm on a break and taking shit in a restroom.


    --
    "Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
  7. What about the stalker who works .... by rben · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...in the same office? The one who uses the company phone location service to pursue and harass women in the office. What about the abusive husband who works for the same company as his wife and locates the women's shelter because of the company cell phone? As can be demonstrated by many abuses, companies aren't very good at keeping this kind of data protected from people that shouldn't have it. It's going to end up causing a certain amount of grief and accompanying lawsuits.

    I'm sure that many people will accept this kind of intrusion into their privacy, simply because it will be a condition of employment. That giant stick that has been bashing holes in our personal privacy for some time now.

    This technology will undoubtedly provide some useful services, but it will also be abused. My guess is that it will take quite a lot of abuse before proper rules and restrictions are put in place so that people can control when they are being monitored.

    --

    -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
    www.ra

  8. Privacy is dead, join the fishbowl.... by jjh37997 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This wouldn't be such a bad thing if I could track the cell phones of the people who are tracking me. I really don't see what's so bad about letting my boss track me as long as I'm able to follow him around. It's the imbalance of power that's the main problem with typical surveillance. Want to track my movements with a camera? Go ahead.... but only if I get to know who's watching me and I have the ability to watch them back. An open and transparent society can make the world both safe and free. As it is now the powerful, well-connected and criminal can invade your privacy any time they want... privacy laws only prevent us from spying on them.