What happens when every minute of your working day becomes data?
Digital monitoring is now part of everyday working life, particularly in call centres, remote work, warehouses and delivery services. Employers can record logins, breaks, call times, notes and availability changes; some systems track computer activity, location, screenshots and performance targets (Acas, no date).
These tools help organisations understand workloads, but can also turn ordinary behaviour into data that is easily misunderstood without context.
My interest comes from working in remote banking and telephone sales, where each day was split into digital states: available, on a call, completing notes, on a break.
The monitoring felt strongest as a Vodafone sales representative: staff had to select the correct status all day, and forgetting could create an inaccurate record suggesting time was owed to the company.
Employees were expected to be ready the moment the shift began — often logging in fifteen minutes early without pay. Yet calls that ran over target had to be explained, and a separate team messaged anyone whose status looked wrong. Every minute had to be justified.
Monitoring is not automatically harmful: it can help employers plan staffing, calculate hours, identify missed calls and recognise where employees need support or training. Accurate records also support fair pay, safety and accountability.
The problem is not simply whether information is collected, but how much, how it is interpreted and what decisions are made from it (Information Commissioner's Office, 2023).
Understanding demand so that staffing levels match the work that actually arrives.
Accurate records of working hours can support fair and correct pay.
Identifying missed calls and patterns in customer demand.
Recognising where employees need additional support or development.
Digital systems measure what is easiest to count rather than what matters most. A long call may look inefficient when the customer had a complicated problem; detailed notes reduce call numbers while protecting the customer and the next adviser.
When managers treat the system as objective, employees are judged without the context needed to understand their performance (APPG on the Future of Work, 2021). In the UK and abroad, Amazon's warehouse tracking has drawn news coverage, union criticism and a US Senate investigation (Hadero, 2024).
Constant monitoring also affects trust and wellbeing, pressuring workers to rush customers, shorten breaks or focus on appearing active (Trades Union Congress, 2020).
The most publicised example of workplace monitoring. Amazon's target-driven tracking of warehouse work regularly reaches the national news and union campaigns, and a US Senate investigation examined the link between its speed targets and worker injuries.
Sustainable development is not only environmental: it includes social and economic conditions that can continue without harming people.
SDG 8 promotes productive employment and decent work: fair pay, reasonable conditions, dignity, security and respect (United Nations, 2015). Monitoring may support this goal when it improves safety, organisation and accountability — and undermine it when it produces unpaid preparation, excessive pressure, intrusive surveillance or decisions built on incomplete data.
Workers should know what is being monitored and why.
Employers should only collect information that is genuinely necessary.
Performance data should never be interpreted without understanding the circumstances.
Employees should be able to challenge inaccurate records or automated conclusions.
Required preparation, logging in and administrative work should be properly recognised.
Monitoring can improve how workplaces operate, but efficiency should not come at the cost of dignity, trust or fair treatment.
My argument is not that monitoring should disappear, but that these systems should remain tools rather than unquestionable judges. Data shows what happened on a system; it cannot always explain why. Workers are more than statuses, timers and scores.
Good management
uses data.
Decent work still requires
human judgement.
United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution A/RES/70/1. New York: United Nations General Assembly. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
Acas (no date) Managing staff who work from home: monitoring performance. London: Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service. https://www.acas.org.uk/managing-staff-who-work-from-home/monitoring-performance
All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Future of Work (2021) The new frontier: artificial intelligence at work. London: APPG on the Future of Work. https://www.ifow.org/publications/new-frontier-artificial-intelligence-work
Information Commissioner's Office (2023) Employment practices and data protection: monitoring workers. Wilmslow: ICO. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/employment/
Trades Union Congress (2020) Technology managing people: the worker experience. London: TUC. https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/technology-managing-people-worker-experience
Hadero, H. (2024) 'Senate report alleges Amazon rejected warehouse safety recommendations due to productivity concerns', AP News, 16 December. https://apnews.com/article/amazon-warehouse-worker-injuries-senate-committee-eb5b72dd501be0bcce9d919c34731290