Earlier this week, employees at a mid-sized tech services company in Bengaluru discovered that their organisation had covertly installed an auto-capture screen monitoring software. This software takes random screenshots every 10 minutes without explicit consent from the employees. A whistleblower post on Reddit revealed internal emails showing that managers were instructed to review these screenshots during weekly performance reviews. The employees were shocked as this policy was never disclosed during onboarding or in the employee handbook. The leak spread rapidly across social media, triggering public criticism and internal panic. Employees began demanding the immediate removal of the tool and clarity on the duration of image storage.
The employees reacted with fear, betrayal, and indignation. Many felt violated knowing their personal browsing moments, messages, and even bank logins could have been captured involuntarily. Some were unable to focus on work due to anxiety. A few team leads quietly admitted that they too were uncomfortable with the surveillance but implemented it under pressure to improve productivity metrics. This moral discomfort escalated into heated debates within company groups about autonomy, trust, and whether HR had become complicit in intrusive managerial practices.
Undisclosed screen monitoring poses significant legal risks under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, which requires explicit consent, purpose limitation, and transparency in handling personal data. Employers may also face consequences under the IT Act if sensitive data was captured without safeguards. HR must urgently pause monitoring tools, issue clear notices, delete non-compliant data, and conduct privacy impact assessments. Leadership must create transparent monitoring policies that respect dignity and privacy while addressing productivity expectations. In the modern workplace, surveillance without informed consent is not just a cultural failure but a potential statutory violation with reputational consequences.
What principles should guide ethical monitoring policies in modern workplaces? How can HR rebuild trust after undisclosed surveillance is exposed?
The employees reacted with fear, betrayal, and indignation. Many felt violated knowing their personal browsing moments, messages, and even bank logins could have been captured involuntarily. Some were unable to focus on work due to anxiety. A few team leads quietly admitted that they too were uncomfortable with the surveillance but implemented it under pressure to improve productivity metrics. This moral discomfort escalated into heated debates within company groups about autonomy, trust, and whether HR had become complicit in intrusive managerial practices.
Undisclosed screen monitoring poses significant legal risks under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, which requires explicit consent, purpose limitation, and transparency in handling personal data. Employers may also face consequences under the IT Act if sensitive data was captured without safeguards. HR must urgently pause monitoring tools, issue clear notices, delete non-compliant data, and conduct privacy impact assessments. Leadership must create transparent monitoring policies that respect dignity and privacy while addressing productivity expectations. In the modern workplace, surveillance without informed consent is not just a cultural failure but a potential statutory violation with reputational consequences.
What principles should guide ethical monitoring policies in modern workplaces? How can HR rebuild trust after undisclosed surveillance is exposed?