Employee location awareness tracking: big brother or best practice?

Employers have been tracking staff time and attendance for years, and, as a result, employee monitoring is now a familiar thing. However, modern tracking technologies have significantly expanded beyond punch clocks and manual timesheets allowing for precise real-time monitoring that was unimaginable just a few decades ago.

Organisations can now track every movement of every worker. From desk-based office workers to field-based, frontline and remote staff. But just because it’s possible, does that make it right?

Today’s article looks at both digital and physical employee tracking, including whether or not such tools can be used ethically to support a better, happier, and more modern workplace.

The rise of digital desk monitoring

Some systems can record keystroke activity, take periodic screenshots, or access webcams to monitor activity – which can, understandably, seem intrusive. And in most cases, these tools are seen as an over-reach of authority from employers who, frankly, don’t trust their staff.

But when used ethically, these kinds of digital monitoring technologies have been transformational and liberating, giving businesses increasing confidence to offer remote work and gig work – a highly prized asset in the modern workforce.

As a result, employee monitoring tech has good user acceptance within the digital working culture, and in many instances, is not regarded as overly intrusive.

However, the rise of sophisticated technologies has ushered in a new era of employee monitoring more specific to the non-desk-based worker sector, which needs examining. This employee location awareness tracking software uses technology to monitor employees’ real-time location – including people who work out in the field, or even within large, complex indoor environments.

Common methods include GPS tracking via smartphones, RFID badges, and dedicated tracking devices. Some systems like Sense can even offer person-level accuracy indoors, using advanced and proprietary hardware.

The benefits of employee location tracking

For the non-desk-based sector, employee location tracking is mission-critical functionality as there is an undeniable connection between productivity and the physical location of staff.

These systems can provide employers with detailed insights into their workforce’s movements and activities throughout the workday, enabling them to identify efficiencies and optimise productivity. They can also help to protect staff by allowing them to work safely in a different environment or the field, or they can protect a business against theft complaints or legal action.

The UK GDPR authority (ICO) advocates employee location monitoring for such purposes if it is being used for a legitimate purpose, which is a core tenet of GDPR. Therefore, if the other 7 key principles of GDPR are followed, monitoring employee location is considered an ethical form of employee surveillance and cutting-edge performance management best practice.

The risk of over-surveillance

However, employers should ensure that GDPR is carefully applied to employee monitoring in their organisations so it remains ethical, proportionate, and not excessive, as in the recent Amazon case.

Amazon were found to be in breach of GDPR law and fined for “excessive” surveillance. The CNIL found that Amazon tracked worker activity so closely (via hand scanner data) that it could lead to workers having to justify each break, which they deemed unfair and unlawful. Concern was raised about two alerts that tracked worker breaks of between 1 and 10 minutes and over 10 minutes. Amazon disagreed with the findings.

We are not here to cast judgment, as this is a matter for Amazon and CNIL. But we simply wanted to highlight the importance of applying GDPR doctrine to ensure the ethical integrity of your mission-critical employee location monitoring program.

It’s worth pointing out that the CNIL was objecting to what they regarded as over-surveillance and not employee activity/location monitoring perse which is a sound practice when implemented appropriately.

Implementation of employee location tracking lawfully and effectively

The UK information commissioner has even recently introduced draft guidance to help UK employers implement employee location monitoring lawfully. They give two specific examples of how to avoid intrusive or excessive levels of surveillance.

1. In a hypothetical situation, a team member in a fleet used their car for both work and personal reasons and so the company ensures that the employee has the option to turn off employee location awareness tracking outside work hours.
2. In another hypothetical situation a furniture warehouse manager wants to install CCTV in their warehouse to check staff are adhering to health and safety as there have been accidents. However, to limit the CCTV’s privacy intrusion the cameras are confined to high-risk areas of the loading bay, and signs are installed explaining that the cameras are being used as part of additional training.

GDPR considerations are not unique to employee location monitoring and apply to any privacy-related workflow or system within a business. By conducting an initial and regular audit of your employee location monitoring against the following 7 GDPR principles, you can properly safeguard this activity as you do with other privacy-related activity in the business:

1. Lawfulness, fairness, and transparency with staff
2. Purpose limitation – only use personal data for the reasons you collected it.
3. Data minimisation – limit the amount of personal data you collect to what you need.
4. Accuracy – the personal details in your records should be accurate and kept up to date.
5. Storage limitation – only keep personal data for as long as you need it.
6. Integrity and confidentiality (security) – personal data needs to be kept securely..
7. Accountability – Keeping records to demonstrate how you achieve data protection compliance.

By applying these principles to an employee location awareness implementation employers can ensure their surveillance is not only productivity-enhancing but ethical, proportionate, and socially acceptable.

Remembering that monitoring enables good management – it does not force good behaviour

The mistake many employers make when considering employee monitoring tools – both digital and physical – is using them as a way to rule with an iron fist.

This is not how such tools are most effectively used. Rather, you should be taking responsibility for motivating and empowering your employees to be happy and confident at work – through this culture building, you’ll naturally increase productivity.

However, sometimes employee monitoring tools can help us to identify where the problems are occurring – helping us to build culture and good leadership in the right areas, within the right teams.

Tools like Sense can also help you protect your employees while enabling location-based tools, such as automatic clocking in or out. Without intruding on privacy – there are no microphones, webcams, or key logs. But you can understand things like office space utilisation, average task times, shift lengths, overtime, and more.

As technology continues to evolve, so will the debate around employee monitoring. But if employers commit to thoughtful implementation and respect for privacy, they can ensure that location tracking remains an organizational best practice rather than an ethical overreach