GPS Trackers

[ballen0351]

I get what your saying but if I as an employer am paying your for 8 hours of work and one way to make sure I'm getting my full 8 hours out of you is to track your movements I don't really care of you like it or not honestly.

 

[Transk53]

I think you points you make are very valid Ballen, I choose not to based on personal principle.

I've seen trust broken and abuse of privilege on both sides before. But tracking is just another facet.

I also think your role in society has different expectations and requirements. All I can imagine is the benefits and safety aspects would out weight the negatives.

But the 95% of the rest of the population don't have to deal with anything remotely confronting as you would.

If an employers purpose to track is to performance manage its employees, I see ethical issues with allowing this, as it's give an inch, take a mile. There are plenty of ways to do this without knowing someone's longitude and latitude. And without good reason, is just another element to squeeze more out of people and put them over the barrel.

Yes, over the barrel al right, and as I have been pointing out, no good reason.

 

[ballen0351]

Yes, over the barrel al right, and as I have been pointing out, no good reason.

Over a barrel of what? Making sure your working when your being paid to work is not unfair in my opinion

 

[Transk53]

No it is not about working, they already know that. The fact that as a security officer carrying police grade equipment, GPS Tracking. No way man, no way.

 

[jezr74]

It's up to the employer sure. But it also is part of the workplace environment. Places of that nature generally have high turn around of staff and bad reputation, revenue is driven my stock value and less about making a work friendly environment.

Definitely has a pecking order as well, depending where you are on the pay scale, your treated differently. It would't surprise anyone that I'm a supporter of unions as well.

 

[ballen0351]

No it is not about working, they already know that. .

Apparently not which is why they want GPS

 

[jezr74]

Over a barrel of what? Making sure your working when your being paid to work is not unfair in my opinion

Just forcing people to do something with the threat of job loss is over the barrel. As I've said, there are plenty of ways to performance manage staff, you don't need to track them, or paint every staff member with the same brush because there might be a single bad apple. It's also not uncommon to use superfluous reasons to sack someone from a position, GPS tracking reaks of it.

 

[ballen0351]

It's up to the employer sure. But it also is part of the workplace environment. Places of that nature generally have high turn around of staff and bad reputation, revenue is driven my stock value and less about making a work friendly environment.

Definitely has a pecking order as well, depending where you are on the pay scale, your treated differently. It would't surprise anyone that I'm a supporter of unions as well.

Nobody forces you to work there. You choose to work there you follow their rules

 

[jezr74]

Nobody forces you to work there. You choose to work there you follow their rules

Yep, but being in a role and have them introduce something new is different, telling someone who is a hard worker, that they want to start doing something that is ethically questionable for the type of work they are doing so they can have more leverage on the employee when deemed it's needed, but if you don't like it you can quit, is over the barrel.

If you applying for a position, if they have full disclosure and state they like to run their operation like a chicken farm they should. But you'd want to know your time and material is tracked by GPS and you will be accountable to the minute, not a great selling point if your wanting to attract professionals.

So I agree on new contracts\positions, it's up to the employee to have disclosure and the candidate can decide.

 

[Steve]

Yes, over the barrel al right, and as I have been pointing out, no good reason.

I think this is the disagreement. I think holding you accountable for the time I'm paying you is a very good reason. Good enough all by itself. An employee with nothing to hide wouldn't care one way or the other, in my experience. In fact, hard working employees often welcome things like this, as it keeps the slackers on task and lightens the quality employees' load.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Transk53]

I think this is the disagreement. I think holding you accountable for the time I'm paying you is a very good reason. Good enough all by itself. An employee with nothing to hide wouldn't care one way or the other, in my experience. In fact, hard working employees often welcome things like this, as it keeps the slackers on task and lightens the quality employees' load.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

No, way off.

 

[ballen0351]

Just forcing people to do something with the threat of job loss is over the barrel. As I've said, there are plenty of ways to performance manage staff, you don't need to track them, or paint every staff member with the same brush because there might be a single bad apple. It's also not uncommon to use superfluous reasons to sack someone from a position, GPS tracking reaks of it.

If you do your job you don't need to worry about it. People are freaking at my work because if body cameras. Me I'm like who cares I don't do things I'm not supposed to anyway so my footage will be boring

 

[Tez3]

Nobody forces you to work there. You choose to work there you follow their rules

Yay the quote thingy worked! ( I am a computer illiterate, always surprised when something works, usually I just click everything, sorry I digress)

Here though, employers aren't supposed to just change the rules, employees are supposed to have a contract with their terms and conditions on, this includes a job description. The protection in that works both ways, an employee can't say he wasn't aware he had to do a certain task and the employer can't go adding more and more task or change the terms and conditions without negotiation. This would normally involve being paid more for extra tasks etc. Again works for both sides, once agreed the employee has to do the task.
That's how it's supposed to be legally in this country, now whether the GPS is a new 'task' or something new under the terms and conditions I don't know, I also don't know where Transk works so almost impossible to speculate whether it's a good idea safety wise or for the employer, he could be shooting himself in the foot. All MOD vehicles carry GPS but not employees so have no experience with them. ( not a lot of help really!)

 

[Tez3]

Tracking and work. Citizens Advice - Monitoring at work
also Citizens Advice - Basic rights at work

 

[jezr74]

If you do your job you don't need to worry about it. People are freaking at my work because if body cameras. Me I'm like who cares I don't do things I'm not supposed to anyway so my footage will be boring

I do my job, and don't need it. If there is a problem with my performance there are policies and procedures already in place to address. Or my employer could talk to me.

Anyone OK with it, go for it, there is always people that won't care.

 

[ballen0351]

I do my job, and don't need it. If there is a problem with my performance there are policies and procedures already in place to address. Or my employer could talk to me.

Anyone OK with it, go for it, there is always people that won't care.

Alot of time stuff like this is put in place to deal with a particular employee. They can't "single" one out so they make sweeping policy changes because of 1 person. So you may be doing your job just fine that doesn't mean everyone is.

 

[jezr74]

Alot of time stuff like this is put in place to deal with a particular employee. They can't "single" one out so they make sweeping policy changes because of 1 person. So you may be doing your job just fine that doesn't mean everyone is.

yeah, that's a good example of possible bad management. It's a tactic not uncommon, normally used if the employer or line manager doesn't know how to directly deal with an under performing employee. It reflects badly on management and can be a result of managers not really skilled properly to handle their role.

Can end badly for a department when treating everyone the same as the lowest denominator, low moral, people leave etc.

 

[ballen0351]

it's usually used so nobody can comeback and scream discrimination.

 

[jezr74]

it's usually used so nobody can comeback and scream discrimination.

Buts that why there are HR departments to deal with these things, policies, procedures, performance reviews etc. If there is actual merit to performance managing someone, they can normally do it. But there are lazy ways to do it as well, by punishing everyone, rather than gong through the process or back them into corners.

Not saying it doesn't swing both ways.

 

[Transk53]

Buts that why there are HR departments to deal with these things, policies, procedures, performance reviews etc. If there is actual merit to performance managing someone, they can normally do it. But there are lazy ways to do it as well, by punishing everyone, rather than gong through the process or back them into corners.

Not saying it doesn't swing both ways.

Which is pretty much what we as employees have to endure. It is like this in structure. We have commercial management in Land Securities. We have an Estate management company for the residential (apartments) side of things. Thirdly there is the marina company looking after the boating side of things. Then there the company I work for that are sub contracted to all three through the contract agreement.

The security contract for the client, which in this case is the site security manager and Estates, who own the majority of holdings, are who we have to work through. Generally Land Securities and the Estates. They are generally the ones through the site security manager that give us extra duties. No where in my contract does stipulate that we have to wear body cams. No where in our contract did it say that when issuing parking tickets, we were to receive a new PDA for the job.

No this all emanates from one, maybe two people, while competing with each other. We have to put up with this because the company I actually work for, have to tread on egg shells due to the fact the the security contract props up the company pretty much. It is not there fault though, we have other divisions as well, so if the security contract is lost, the company would likely go bust. So, the usual pandering to a minority of right handers. As such my boss, the contract security manager, has very little influence due to the overall situation. A union would likely chew up the place, but would spit out too many bodies. Morally I might be questionable, but I am not reprehensible. As usual, the big barrel with the words "I own your ****" painted on it.