A new report on workplace surveillance laws in Victoria found employees may not realise the full extent of surveillance practices
Workplace surveillance in Victoria has grown in popularity, but legislation to regulate it has not kept pace, according to a new report.
An inquiry by the Economy and Infrastructure Committee tabled in Victoria's Legislative Assembly this month found that workplace surveillance has become "more common in Victoria" in the wake of advancing technology and the pandemic-induced shift to remote work driving demand for such tech.
"Newer technologies have enabled more sophisticated surveillance that collects data at a greater and more granular scale," the report read.
"In addition, employers are using artificial intelligence to process workplace surveillance data and reach conclusions about workers' behaviour, sentiment, and performance using algorithms that are not transparent and could be biased."
Surveillance practices varied by industry, according to the report. But some of the reported forms of it are the following:
But the report noted that employees in Victoria are rarely informed about these surveillance practices and are unaware of their full extent.
Information gathered by the report from various groups indicated that a significant proportion of employees were "unsure if their employers were conducting surveillance in the workplace".
"Even when employers disclose that workplace surveillance is occurring, they might not provide other relevant information such as the specific forms of surveillance used, how the data might be used for performance management, and what recourse workers have if they feel the surveillance is too intrusive, negatively affecting their health or not being used for the intended purposes," the report read.
According to the report, the impact of intrusive workplace surveillance is "negative."
"When employees feel that workplace surveillance is intrusive or their employers are not being transparent about it, they are less likely to trust their managers and are less committed to their organisation, resulting in disengagement, poor workplace culture and increased staff turnover."
It may also cause workplace accidents and injuries if employees feel excessively monitored, and poses a risk to workers' privacy if their families or community members are captured by surveillance devices used outside of the workplace.
Despite the widespread workplace monitoring, the report found that Victoria's laws have not kept pace with it.
Victoria's Surveillance Devices Act 1999 only prohibits optical and listening surveillance in workplace toilets, washrooms, change rooms, and lactation rooms. It also requires consent for location tracking and the recording of private activities and conversations.
"The way these terms are defined in the Act means that most instances of workplace surveillance do not fall within its scope," the report read.
"In addition, the Act only addresses data surveillance in terms of its use by law enforcement officers, which demonstrates how outdated the law is when surveillance by computers is one of the most common forms of workplace surveillance used in Victoria today."
Alison Marchant, chair of the committee, said the committee is recommending that the state introduce new workplace surveillance laws that are technology neutral and will ensure that surveillance is reasonable and necessary.
"Victorian employers should be required to notify and consult with workers about workplace surveillance practices and disclose how workers' data will be collected, used, and stored," Marchant said in the foreword.
