What do you think about working remotely? Do you believe it promotes a better work-life balance or does it cause a haze? Why am I addressing you in this manner? Because I want to share two stories with you that both involve work. Work remotely or from home. But their differences could not be greater. The first one concerns staff surveillance.

A former employee filed a lawsuit against him in court. He said that the company required him to leave his webcam on while he was at work. We are referring to eight hours per day. That person, who? Evidently, businesses do. The in question is a software firm with headquarters in the US. It has the name Chetu. The worker was let go because he wouldn't share his laptop screen or leave his camera on at all times. The employer claimed that the employee's rejection of monitoring amounted to a rejection of work. The worker, who was from the Netherlands, was let go. After being let go, he brought a lawsuit at a nearby court.

The company Chetu has been ordered to pay $73,000 by the court

What did the judge rule? The court ruled in favour of the employee and stated that camera tracking is an invasion of the employee's privacy. Additionally, Chetu was mandated to pay the worker almost $73,000. Now, one can counter that the employer, not the workers after hours, was doing the surveillance of work hours. But does that justify keeping an employee under observation? The question is whether your job contract grants your employer the authority to keep an eye on you or behave as your big brother even though you give them eight or nine hours of your day.

In a poll done by Digital.com, more than 200 employees were questioned. According to the poll, 60% of remote workers use software for work monitoring. 90% of these businesses admitted to firing workers as a result of information obtained from these software platforms. Thus, employee surveillance is a reality. In several nations, including the US, it can be against the law. However, it does not prevent employers from being wary.

On to the subsequent tale. And this is the complete opposite. It concerns Google, another American business. For four weeks a year, it enables employees to work from any location. The purpose is to increase everyone's travel flexibility. These two narratives show the two opposing perspectives on the current tension between employee monitoring and workplace flexibility. Some businesses are content to simply leave their staff alone. As long as they provide, they don't care where they work. So it makes sense that a UK pub chain is introducing a work-from-pub programme. In essence, for £15—roughly $16—you have WiFi, a desk, unlimited tea, coffee, and lunch.

Therefore, coming back to the original query, can working from home ensure a better work-life balance or does it blur the line? It all comes down to the employer, and I believe you would concur. Some employers have accepted that an employee's activity does not necessarily translate into production. Her performance is independent of her physical presence in the office or if she works remotely. Others, who are perhaps more traditional in their approach, focus on the number of video meetings you participate in as well as the hours you log in.

I'm not sure how many of you are aware, but there is software that enables employers to keep an eye on your job behaviour without the use of cameras. An employer can access information from Microsoft 365, for instance, on how many emails a person wrote, how many files they saved on a shared drive, and how many video sessions they attended. Similarly for Google workplace. Your manager can view how many emails you sent or received as well as how many employees showed up at a certain meeting if your company uses Google's Work tools.

It's only a surface-level activity to send emails. It's not the most accurate scale for gauging production. Similar to this, someone may spend the entire day passively using a computer. So, is it even desirable to monitor employees? Recognizing results over output and allowing workers the flexibility they require to perform at their highest levels are key to the future of work. One can be working from an office, a bar, a mountain resort, or a beach. or refraining from spending eight or nine hours in front of her computer. As long as she is providing for the organisation and producing value, it shouldn't matter.

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the notion of workplaces forever. Digitalization and the spread of internet literacy has enabled people to work from anywhere they want. There have been some arguments that state that the line between home life and work has been blurred to a great extent. Employers are now able to get the maximum out of their employees as they are available throughout the day. Leaving the workplace earlier used to create a clear separation between work and personal life. Now, however, that separation is increasingly becoming non-existent.

Is your webcam on? Employee refuses, sues and wins $73,000

0 Comments