Large financial union calls for regulations for surveillance of staff

A major financial union has told an  Oireachtas Committee that surveillance of staff by their employers and how data on staff is collected, stored, and used was always an issue that needed to be addressed.

John O'Connell, General Secretary of the Financial Services Union (FSU) addressed the Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment on Wednesday and outlined concerns raised from a survey conducted by the union. 

He said the FSU first commissioned their research in partnership with University of Limerick in 2019 and again in 2021 with a
follow up survey carried out by the FSU in 2023.

The research project sought to establish the experiences and attitudes of financial services employees to technological change in their job and this report focuses on employees’ experiences and attitudes towards technological surveillance by their employer in particular

Following the research, he said "it seems clear from these findings there is a need for regulation and legislation
to keep pace with the changing nature of technology".

"A notable finding in the report is the extent to which respondents to the survey were unaware of the level of employer
tracking and monitoring, with over half indicating they did not know if their office or home computer was monitored.

"Almost one quarter of respondents reported that their employer had increased data collection on their work since
they started home working while 28% said data collection had stayed at the same level.

"Two thirds of respondents felt surveillance was demoralising and indicated that surveillance increased their levels of
stress while over half felt that surveillance at work was a violation of privacy," Mr O'Connell said. 

The report found that a majority felt that surveillance indicated a lack of trust on the part of their employer (60%) while an even larger percentage (63%) felt that the use of surveillance erodes trust.

Survey respondents reported having some experience with technological surveillance of their devices, but significant proportions were unaware if their devices were monitored or not.

"Interviewees spoke of varying levels of employer technological surveillance pre-COVID from very little to very extensive depending on where they worked and their role," Mr O'Connell said. 

"Overall, employees had negative attitudes towards technological surveillance, viewing it as demoralising, stressful, and indicating a lack of trust by employers," he added.