In a recent article I covered the topic of monitoring of remote workers, which is a practice that boomed during the pandemic as remote work itself became a matter of course for many of us. Research from the University of Amsterdam takes the somewhat dramatic stance of comparing such remote monitoring with being in prison.
According to the author, imprisonment encompasses various forms and degrees of limited freedom. The impact of imprisonment extends beyond physical incarceration, considering factors such as maintaining relationships with friends and family, freedom of movement, and the ability to work.
The researcher introduces a new term, “exprisonment,” which refers to the deprivation of liberty occurring not only behind bars but also in other contexts, such as on the streets and within one’s home.
Expanding the definition
Expanding the definition of imprisonment is deemed important because it introduces a different conceptual and legal framework. For instance, when examining employee monitoring, it is typically perceived as an infringement on informational privacy. However, by considering it as a form of depriving liberty, it carries different legal implications.
In the context of employee monitoring, the researcher argues that monitoring practices can significantly restrict individuals’ freedom. They cite the example of Teleperformance, a prominent call center company, which employs extensive digital monitoring of its remote workers.
This surveillance includes webcams with facial recognition, location tracking, keyboard activity monitoring, and even requesting permission to use the bathroom at home, with the manager being notified if the request is made. Such stringent monitoring systems can be likened to a type of imprisonment, where individuals may feel chained to their desks during certain periods.
Employee surveillance
The concept of exprisonment has gained traction in philosophical and legal literature, spanning areas such as criminal law, labor law, and human rights. Its adoption underscores the notion that imprisonment can occur outside traditional prisons and highlights the varying degrees of imprisonment.
The author’s primary objective is to stimulate contemplation on the subject of imprisonment, particularly as it pertains to liberty deprivation in everyday settings, especially in light of advancements in technology. The prevalence of webcam monitoring for home-based workers in the Netherlands, heightened by the pandemic, serves as an example.
The argument that individuals have nothing to hide does not hold water when considering it as a form of imprisonment alongside concerns about employees’ control over their information and data.
