Comments on: Hiding From Big Brother

By: Funky Dung

Funky Dung — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

LOL. I think Lightwave was victimized by spellchecker.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I checked the original reference.

They're using RFIDs in warehouses, not whorehouses.

Just thought I'd help.

By: gbm3

gbm3 — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Don't know about this tag system. Managers should be good enough to know how good a worker is without needing a house arresting device.

Along the same lines, employees with computers should have their monitor facing out so everyone can see it. There are way too many employees that hide theirs from view and do whatever, non-job related (even off their break).

---

By: Lightwave

Lightwave — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I agree with Der Tommissar here. The key is to understand that both workers and employers do unjust things.

While I don't advocate using workers as tools, one cannot ignore the fact that some employees do steal (either productive time, or actual materials). In response to John's comment: If you believe you shouldn't be watched, then you advocate that employers should simply trust in humans to be good people, and wait for tangible evidence before assuming someone requires disciplinary action. If this is so, I also suggest you always leave the doors to your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. Otherwise, it's awfully disrespectful to send a message to every passerby that you think they might steal your car. After all, you can always call the Police after your car gets stolen, right?

I think it is respectable that management understands their duties to their investors, customers, and employees to make sure the company stays viable through ensuring workers actually do work their being paid for. Anything less would be irresponsible.

By: Der Tommissar

Der Tommissar — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

A worker must provide his employer with his labor in exchange for a just wage. The employer, on the other hand, must pay a just wage and not treat his laborers as if they were just a tool to be used in any way he sees fit.

The idea of electric monitoring I think crosses that line.

Unfortunately, both labor and management in this article talk only about money. We all lose.

By: John

John — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Untitled document It's remarkable to me that someone can manage to have so very little pride.

I have worked many jobs where I performed much better than other people doing the same job, and still hate it if a manager watches me. It's disrespectful. I do my job, I should not be checked up on.

When I was working as a tour guide me and the other competent guides refused to talk while any management was in the room, and that made our jobs more dignified and improved the service we provided.

By: howard

howard — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

The thesis you bring here sounds reasonable, but what of workers whose productivity can't be measured so easily? How do they fit into this ideal?

Aside from that, there are some very productive workplaces where such close supervision is not utilized (some where almost no supervision is utilized) — do you think these workplaces would maintain the level of productivity if they were suddenly saddled with more invasive observation techniques by their management?

I guess what I'm saying is that there are some situations where treating your workers like 5-year-olds becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy — at least that's been my observation, based on the past few places I've worked (reflecting over the past decade or so).