A supervisor told a woman not to worry about the company’s new plans for teleworking employees.

Using software, her employer would determine how long she worked from home and would log the names of every Word and Excel file she used. There would be records kept of the subjects on her emails and which websites she viewed, as well as how long she actually operated her computer.

All that data would be shared among management.

“This is not surveillance,” the supervisor explained.

The woman left the company two months later.

“Is working at home impossible without such a thorough staff monitoring system?” the woman said with a sigh.

With more people working from home in the COVID-19 pandemic, employers are using increasingly advanced software to remotely check if staff are loafing on the job.

Some companies say the software is used to prevent extreme overtime. But whatever the reason, employees have expressed concerns about excessive surveillance and rising stress levels because of the monitoring.

UNSHARED DETAILS NOW SHARED

The woman who quit her job had worked as an editor of websites and paper publications.

In January this year, she and her colleagues were encouraged to work from home under the second COVID-19 state of emergency.

According to the employer’s accounts, the monitoring software was intended to see whether proper amounts of work were assigned to each worker and if such tasks were being done efficiently.

The company said it would use the objective numerical data to review workload allocations and improve productivity because there would be far fewer opportunities for staff members to meet their bosses in person.

But the woman and her colleagues could not believe that explanation, and they thought the company “simply wants to ensure that teleworkers are not lying down on the job.”

The woman said she already had no time to relax while on duty because of strict deadlines and constant communication with clients. Being monitored as a teleworker increased the mental pressure on her.

A rumor circulated that “just opening a file to work on would not be regarded as part of the job if nothing is done on it for a certain period of time.”

That rumor heightened fears among workers that their employer was watching their every move.

The woman said she tried to show she was present in front of her PC by working on unimportant email after finishing another task.

While at the office, she said she was assessed based on the quality of her written articles and other outcomes. But after she began teleworking, all unshared details, including websites she referred to for writing, were made clear to management.

“The company cannot trust employees when they are not in the office unless everything is made visible,” the woman said. “The employer’s stance was horrific.”

Although she loved the work, she quit the company by March, saying the monitoring left her with a bad aftertaste.

Some monitoring systems randomly select images of the teleworking employees’ computer screens, and another system uses cameras to take videos of them working.

A Persol Research and Consulting Co. study in March 2020 found that 40 percent of bosses fear at times that teleworkers “may not do their tasks.” The percentage is higher than that of teleworkers who think they “may be considered to be slacking off on the job.”

LABOR-MANAGEMENT TALKS URGED

The Labor Lawyers Association of Japan said in a statement about teleworking in February that it is “a problem that employers constantly monitor the progress of work of employees.”

Lawyer Kazuya Takemura, who is knowledgeable about teleworking, said “surveillance using software is the same as supervisors’ always watching subordinates’ work beside them at the office.”

“Management and labor unions should discuss and determine how far employees should be managed to prevent a psychological burden from being imposed on them,” Takemura said.

Some employers say that if attendance-recording systems are embedded into employees’ computers to check when they log on and off, working times can be very closely controlled, and excessive overtime can be prevented.

“Labor time management is different from surveillance,” Takemura said. “Good use of technologies should be made without going as far as to carry out excessive surveillance.”

The government, which has promoted working from home during the health crisis, is preparing a foundation for a much wider use of teleworking mechanisms.

Labor ministry guidelines revised in March said companies that highly evaluate employees who continue commuting to offices go against the promotion of remote working styles.

The ministry also strongly demands measures to prevent people from working excessive hours outside their offices.

But it is difficult to clearly separate labor time management from surveillance.

“Required first of all is a condition where employees can work securely under the company’s proper control,” said a labor ministry official about work management via the internet. “Talks between labor and management to set rules are important.”

One significant precaution suggested is creating an atmosphere where employees can voice objections if they find the surveillance extreme and uncomfortable.

(This article was written by Ken Sakakibara and Kyosuke Yamamoto.)