Social spy at work

30 September 2011

JOB APPLICANTS FAIL TO GET JOB BECAUSE OF THEIR NEGATIVE DIGITAL FOOTPRINT HARVESTED BY 'SOCIAL SPY' SOFTWARE USED BY EMPLOYERS

GMB in this report is giving advice to members as to what to do and not do so that they don't become a victim of this new 'Social Spy' technology

A new GMB report on surveillance in the workplace shows that employers can now use software that scans the publicly available information on the internet to check where applicants for jobs have information that can stop them getting the job. The report reveals that in America for 5% to 20% of job applicants have something negative out there in cyberspace about themselves.

The report shows that employers can use “Social Intelligence Monitoring” to check existing employees who have made critical comments about their colleagues and managers, unacceptable material being accessed or passed on, looking at websites that are not approved, or undertaking what is called “cyber slacking” when they use workplace resources for personal activities.

The report reveals the extent to which employers can harvest an individual's digital footprint into a usable form. For example, 'Social Sentry' (http://www.teneros.com/) offers a comprehensive service for employers to track any employee across their internet activity, checking if they are disseminating confidential organisation material, or may “engage in any behaviour that could damage a company's reputation … Social Sentry only tracks information that is already public”.

This new GMB report on 'From Workplace Watch To Social Spy: Surveillance In (And By) The Workplace' has been produced by Professor Michael Blakemore and updates the report on surveillance at work which he produced in 2005. A copy of the new report is attached as a pdf at the foot of this release to be downloaded from http://www.gmb.org.uk/A summary of the report is in Notes to Editors below.

The report shows that there has been a deeper integration and power of surveillance technologies since 2005. In 2005 biometric surveillance was at an early stage, and the volume of potential information about individuals was presenting analytical challenges and required a lot of computing power. Indeed, there were some views that the sheer volume of information, and its distributed nature across many data sources and producers/domains (Phone companies, social Web sites, Internet Service Providers etc.), meant that 'information overload' was a protection against the information being used coherently.

That has not been the case, and while the information volumes have increased the computing power and software sophistication have more than matched it, and new and 'smarter' technologies are making it easier to develop integrated surveillance across many domains. Surveillance power is keeping ahead of the information volume.

Paul Campbell, GMB Organiser said, “There has been a rapid blurring of the boundaries between the private and the public information and communication channels. Individuals are leaving a massive digital footprint that can be used against them which will remain in cyberspace for ever.

Workplace Watch has developed into a new Social Spy where workers personal lives are more easily tracked than ever before.

There are ramifications if employers can see what workers are saying about them on social network sites and what the sites contain about workers own social and professional activities, personal habits and lifestyle etc.

Employers and employees need to develop protocols for dealing with this vast quantity of information. GMB in this report is giving advice to members as to what to do and not do so that they don't become a victim of this new 'Social Spy' technology.”

End

Contact: Paul Campbell, GMB Organiser on 07974 249754 or Professor Michael Blakemore on 07884 436629 or GMB Press Office: Steve Pryle on 07921 289880 or Rose Conroy on 07974 251823.

Notes to editors

Summary of GMB report on FROM WORKPLACE WATCH TO SOCIAL SPY: SURVEILLANCE IN (AND BY) THE WORKPLACE

The report that shows how employers can use sophisticated software to watch only what employees are doing in the workplace (Workplace Watch), but what they are saying on online social networks and other communication channels (Social Spy).

A previous version of the report in 2005 identified technologies that pervasively and persistently monitor workplace activity, ranging from wearable computers in retail distribution centres (monitoring the movement and activity rates of employees, with the information system managing their movements) to the monitoring of computer activity such as typing speeds and spelling errors in a process of increasing productivity by staff

The updated report identifies the privacy issues that arise through the extensive development of social networking, online communication, the increasing 'public' visibility of that communication activity and the implications of their use in the workplace.

Noting how the surveillance industry has expanded since the events of 9/11, and offers ever more sophisticated means of electronic monitoring, there is also a shift in the balance of surveillance power where employees can now undertake forms of counter-surveillance of employers, political representatives, and mobilise action through online resources.

This presents significant challenges to the maintenance of privacy of individuals and employees, and potential harm to organisations and employers – the 'privacy paradox', and the extent to which surveillance is 'proportional' to the real problems, and is undertaken with the consent of employees.

The report notes the 'privacy paradox' in the context of positive benefits of monitoring and surveillance (for example for key worker safety, for health monitoring, and for public safety (for example the need for Agencies to share information about risks to children), but then discussed the ways in which 'function-creep' can occur when technologies are taken into areas of pervasive monitoring, and the ways in which the surveillance industry can exploit employers' fears of security risks, employee fraud, and reputational damage.

The integration of surveillance is made much easier by the sophistication of Internet networking and mobile phones. In 2005 phones had cameras and some mobile Internet, but now increasingly are complex integrated technologies with cameras, keyboards, high-quality screens, high-speed mobile Internet access, GPS location facilities, digital compasses and other devices that allow precise location to be tracked within buildings. High-speed Broadband networks allow the real-time monitoring of activities such as the BRULINES service where pervasive monitoring of drink dispensing and sales records is implemented in over 22,000 pubs (one-third of all pubs in the UK).

However, it is the electronic trace that we all leave online that is receiving the attention of the 'Social Spy'. For example, the Social Intelligence Corporation (http://www.socialintel.com/ ) in the USA provides software that scans the publicly available information on the Internet to check where applicants for jobs have a negative online presence, arguing that “5-20% of applicants have something negative out there about them.” Their “Social Intelligence? Monitoring” will also check existing employees for critical comments made about colleagues and managers, unacceptable material being accessed or passed on, looking at Websites that are not approved, or undertaking what is called “cyber slacking” when they use workplace resources for personal activities.

'Social Sentry' (http://www.teneros.com/) offers a comprehensive service for employers to track any employee across their internet activity, checking if they are disseminating confidential organisation material, or may “engage in any behavior that could damage a company's reputation … Social Sentry only tracks information that is already public”

CATAPHORA (http://www.cataphora.com/) provides solutions to monitor not just employee activity, but also to monitor their behaviours to try and predict problems. It checks:

“e-mail, instant messages, calendar events, documents, and even phone logs … Cataphora tracks use of exclamation points, font color, capitalization, punctuation "cursing," the way people sign off in an e-mail, and the overuse of certain words, such as "please."

So, as employees engage more and more with email, social networking, photo sharing, and blogging, they leave behind a detailed audit trail of what they do. And, even if people delete comments or material that they regret it may be that the material has been copied and passed on by others, or a previous version of a Web site has been captured by the Internet Archive (in what is called the WayBack Machine http://wayback.archive.org/web/) and will remain there without any easy way to remove their past material.

The report therefore examines the risks in the rise of pervasive surveillance in the workplace, and also the risks associated with the uncritical use of the communication channels on the Internet. Damage can be caused to all parties in the workplace, and GMB is clear in the need to negotiate 'digital etiquette', ethical practices and standards of behaviour by all parties.

GMB's dos and don'ts of social networking

Do:

· Think carefully before posting anything online.

· Have a clear understanding of what comments about your work will be tolerated by your employer.

· Take time to understand the privacy policies and controls for any social networking or blogging site that you use.

· Use access controls to limit who can see your information – and don't forget who you have granted most detailed access!

· Use a separate email address to register with networking and blogging sites – preferably one that does not include your name.

· Check your privacy settings often. Think about who you allow as friends, and remember who they are.

· Consider that some people may not be who they say they are.

· Report users who violate the terms of use for the sites you are on.

· Be aware of your employer's policy on the use of electronic communications. You might not be allowed to use sites like Facebook in work hours.

· Clearly state in your bio that all views are your own personal opinions and not those of your employer.

Don't

· Publish your email address, telephone number or home address.

· Choose an email address that reveals private information about you.

· Make public other identifying information, such as your date of birth.

This process must also involve constructive and meaningful dialogue with employers so that employees understand that limits that exist regarding surveillance, and can then work together with employers to maximise the business benefits for all stakeholders.

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.