People aged 16-29 in low-skilled jobs are 49% more likely to be surveilled at work.

Submitted by PuzzBat9019 t3_123gx0m in Futurology

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/mar/26/dystopian-surveillance-disproportionately-targets-young-female-minority-workers-ippr-report

>“A certain amount of surveillance helps women feel more secure. For example, if there is CCTV and you, as a woman, are the only person on your floor or even five floors – it can lure you into a false sense of security. But it’s a false sense of security, the footage won’t be watched until later, so anyone who sees anything that may have happened is after the fact."

Does surveillance automatically result in a higher level of security? Or more interestingly, even if everything is now filmed, does this result in higher justice for victims in the workplace? Lastly, are we willing to give up a sense of security for an increase in privacy?

132

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

johnmatrix84 t1_jdv1w5l wrote

Cameras, cops, restraining orders, etc. do absolutely nothing to stop a criminal determined to harm you.

20

Susgatuan t1_jdv88w8 wrote

Surveillance does deter minor offenders and first time offenders. It absolutely helps women with minor incidents like gropings and other intimidating behavior.

But ultimately major incidents won't be affected. Usually this is why buildings need to be locked up. It's likely that anyone willing to commit a major offense in that scenario is not someone attached to the building itself. Anyone within a company can be easily traced, they'd also be aware of the surveillance.

I think the idea this does nothing is ignorant, deterance is a major factor for the most frequent incidents.

14

herscher12 t1_jdvbapz wrote

Why is this even here? And whats with this focus on women?

4

[deleted] t1_jdvr6m0 wrote

Nope. The only way it's remotely useful in preventing crime is if someone is paying careful attention to the feed, and even if that's your only job it the human mind can only process so much data at one time, and CCTV operators typically have a fuck ton of other shit dumped on them because it's not a "Real" job. You can't really watch more than about 4-6 feeds tops without having to ignore some of them, let alone when you're taking calls, making logs and whatever else they want you to do to feel like they're getting their money's worth out of you. Source: was a CCTVs operator.

Just having a camera doesn't mean much if anything in crime prevention. Even if someone sees what's happening to you and immediately sends help your way, a lot can happen in the time it takes help to actually reach you.

Feeling secure and *being* secure are two different things and the former is actually a bad thing, since it robs you of the opportunity to realize you're at risk and be alert. Every time I hear someone whining about feeling safe, I want to slap them for that reason.

2

Steamer61 t1_jdvtdxo wrote

I gotta agree with Ben Franklin on this: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

2

mandru t1_jdvvmqp wrote

Replying to johnmatrix84 (#2,389,464)

If you place the idea this way nothing except an army of highly trained mercenaries loyal to you will stop criminals to harm.

Yet as a general population we live in the safest era there ever was.

12

PolychromeMan t1_jdvyclb wrote

Replying to mandru (#2,394,178)

>Yet as a general population we live in the safest era there ever was.

Probably due largely to more food and education and overall progress in most places that were previously less developed. I'm not sure it has much to do w/security measures or the lack of them. In any case, it's certainly nice that violence has been trending down for many decades in most places.

5

MpVpRb t1_jdw1wyu wrote

Low skilled workers often do poor and minimal effort work. It's not surprising that managers want to watch them

1

mandru t1_jdw5m2a wrote

Replying to mirddes (#2,395,167)

I don't really think you know how bad women had it 50 yeas ago.

One of my grandma's words of wisdom ware " He was a good husband, he hardly ever beat her"

50 years ago women had no rights to speak of.

5

13thOyster t1_jdw7krz wrote

(Sarcasm, naturally...)

Well, of course! They are poor, after all. Everybody knows that poor people are morally inferior... otherwise, they wouldn't be poor. Poverty is God's punishment for moral inferiority. I mean, look a Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein... monuments to moral rectitude! You've got to keep your eye on the poor... That's why the police exist...to protect the property of the rich (and the rich themselves, of course) from the poor. Corporations are just helping the poor stay in their lane and be honest (against their natural impulses).

1

HorrorCharacter5127 t1_jdwm4eb wrote

Hate being watched at jobs and micromanaged. Rather work off premise ones where I can do my own thing with a productivity goal or set task for day

2

cote112 t1_jdwq1af wrote

Is this because management expects this age group to be paying attention to their phone more than the job they're being paid to do?

2

madewitrealfruit t1_jdxdqqq wrote

I am in a highly regulated industry and surveillance is a part of life. I have had my LinkedIn flagged multiple times. I have emails, IMs verified etc. I hear people say they use curse words or don't talk in code or talk shit on their managers or company and am surprised. I saw last week Apple is counting badge swipes which isn't unique to them as people go back into the office. As technology gets better I think we will see more surveillance, bit it's more up to the company to choose if they use it. It exists if you use basic web tools like anything Microsoft.

1