A Load Of Bullocks — GPS Tracking Is A Murderer? (Continued)
Table of contents for GPS Murderer
- A Load Of Bullocks — GPS Tracking Is A Murderer?
- A Load Of Bullocks — GPS Tracking Is A Murderer? (Continued)
Several weeks back I reported on an article which raised the question, could employee tracking via GPS be responsible for suicide? Is it really that wrong and invasive? Well regular readers know that I focus on the positive aspects of GPS Tracking for Business ROI and it is easy to prove that GPS employee tracking is one of the best financial investments a business can make. Most importantly in today’s tight economic times and high fuel prices.
And as I reported in the original GPS as a Killer article, employees have no right or expectation of privacy when they are taking someone’s money, ostensibly to work. I do know, from looking for what people search for here on www.satviz.com, the site about using GPS tracking for profit that there are a lot of crooked employees out there. For every search that asks about the benefits of GPS tracking there are at least a dozen asking about defeating GPS tracking. Well, I have news for the ‘defeatists” … I’m pro tracking and intend to stay that way.
Getting back to the article, one of the most astounding claims is that the fact that Telstra, a larger telecommunications provider, tracked their field employee’s vehicles as they went about their jobs and this caused an employee so much stress he committed suicide. A number of folks seem to have taken up the cause that the company’s “excessive surveillance” led directly up to Mr. Dousset’s unfortunate death. let’s look at what seems to be “excessive”:
One such tracker, the GoFinder Reporter, sends employers detailed daily time sheets showing every stop made, parked time, driving time, distance covered, maximum speed and even an estimate of the amount of fuel used. Each location can be displayed on a street map or Google Earth.
OK, let’s talk about “excessive” here. Telco technicians sent to the field are hardly low-rate workers. It takes quite a bit of skill to be able to perform that work, not to mention an easy $200,000 USD investment per service truck. Now in addition to what seems to be the basic fact that any employer should be allowed to monitor such an investment, consider this:
- I have installed hundreds and hundreds of tracking units. I have yet to find a single case where employers did not find significant “time stealing”. Even an (honest) union should not be able to argue that the employee owes a days work for a day’s pay. Certainly if the employer was cheating the workers they would be on the employer instantly, as would only be right. Employment is a two-way street, is it not? The law and basic fairness dictates neither side should cheat the other.
- For every case where an employer found a worker where he isn’t supposed to be I can cite you a offsetting case where the employee was accused of wrong doing, perhaps by an angry customer, and was proved to be doing his job correctly by GPS tracking. More than one employee has been saved from actual legal liability by proving, via GPS tracking, s/he was not in the wrong place at the wrong time. Good workers are proud to show off their work.
- Many field employees have to cover a lot of ground. What happens if they are in an accident, victim of a crime, mechanical breakdown, etc.? isn’t a means to keep them safer in their day-to-day rounds worth something? It’s perfectly logical to look at this as a safety service the employer provides. Don’t the workers in this case have to wear little hard hats, seat belts, safety shoes and such provided by the employer? Why doesn’t the union complain about that? Because it would be stupid to put free choice of hazardous actions in lace of on the job safety, that’s why.
Business owners can also log on to a website to view the current position of any of their vehicles at five-minute intervals.
Privacy experts and unions say employers need good justification for snooping so closely on employee movements and even then do not require such highly detailed reports. They question whether employers switch off the tracking outside work hours.
- Let me get this straight. It is excessive ‘snooping’ to insure that vehicles the employer provides for work are only being used for work? If someone came to me back when I was a federal supervisor, I would have referred the guy immediately for drug testing. What are these guys smoking? The employer buys the vehicle, maintains it. \, licenses it, insures it, and (big thing today) fuels it, and it is an invasion of privacy that the owner be able to protect his vehicles from abuse? Wow.
There are a couple other giant lapses of logic in this article that I’ll write more about son. meantime, if you are a business owner, a fleet or operations manager, as government manager or supervisor, listen up!
Regardless of what the talking heads on TV tell you, there has never been a better time to invest in GPS Tracking for Fleet ROI. You will save, immediately, labor hours, fuel and vehicle maintenance. Absolutely. And lose the idea that managing your business is show how snooping or an invasion of privacy. It is, indeed, your responsibility to manage and you can’t manage what you can’t measure.

November 2nd, 2008 at 3:43 am
So, you’d be okay with your employer following you around all day, reading every word you type, listening to everything you say to anyone, watching you go to the toilet and timing you, following you home and watching every stop you make, all because you work for them? Sure you wouldn’t find that stressful?
Also - are you a doctor? Unless you are, I don’t really think that you have any rights to contradict a trained medical practicioner when he claims that stressful work conditions make for a stressed employee.
Sure, you need to make sure employees aren’t abusing your system. But you don’t need to know exactly what they’re doing every second of the day. That’s disturbingly Orwellian territories.
November 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 am
Oh! I almost forgot. “Employees have no right or expectation of privacy when they are taking someone’s money”? So, if your boss decided he wanted to know all about your sex life or else you’d be fired without reference, you’d happily spill the beans (no innuendo intended)?
Also, I find calling a man’s suicide “a load of bollocks” extremely disrespectful.
November 2nd, 2008 at 10:36 pm
@M Nixon: Hello M. Nixon, welcome to the blog and thanks for you comment. I really seem to have struck a nerve with you, eh? Since we are very obviously far apart on these issues, rather than launch into an argument, let me start by asking you to clarify as statement you just made:
“Sure, you need to make sure employees aren’t abusing your system. But you don’t need to know exactly what they’re doing every second of the day”
Sure, I can agree with that in principle Just tell me sir, if youy would, how often _is_ it appropriate to check on workers? Seriously, I’d like to know what you think is fair. It’s obvious you understand that the business owner has rights as well as the employees, so tell me what you feel is an adequate, balanced and fair rate of checking? Perhaps we aren’t as far apart as we think … we’ll never know unless we talk this through.
Now as far as the very unfortunate death of Mr. Dousset, it was not I who used the term bullocks, if you read the source article you can see where I got my information. His name is Mr. Thomas, and I merely quoted him. He gave me a good headline. Perhaps your real issue lies with him … I don’t make the news, I just report it.
I find it interesting that although Mr. Dousset’s doctor’s letter indeed mentions stress involving GPS tracking, neither Mr. Dousset nor his doctor took any action before the tragedy to change the situation. Why the doctor did not choose to order the patient removed from the stressful environment is unknown. Why the company would not be informed of the medical condition of one of their employees is also a mystery. Should they require regular psychiatric screening to detect depression, caused bt GPS or other reasons? Hmm, now that sounds a little Draconian, doesn’t it? By it surely might have saved Mr. Dousset’s life. Again, into the unknown.
You know I don’t want this comment to run on as long as an article, but I’d be glad to give you a platform to rebut my position further, if you care to … just send me an email or plain text or Word file and I’ll be happy to feature it so you get equal timne in theis issue which seem very important to you. You can just sent it directly to: dave@satviz.com
November 2nd, 2008 at 10:43 pm
@M Nixon: Well I would certainly expect my employer … haven’t had one of those in years, life is so much better without a job … anyway, I would expect my employer to supervise my activities, including sexual, during work or in the work place , yep, I’d consider that reasonable and proper.
You know there are police departments where so many incidents of on=the-job sex escapades have occurred that officer are no longer trusted to drive suspects or felons alone? you. me and the rest of the world’s taxpayers have to foot the bill for this .. a simple non-intrusive GPS tracker could insure ther were no unauthorized stops. Of course I guess one could have sex while driving but I’ll leave that issue to others.
And again, read the quotes,. No one called Mr. Dousset’s death “Bullocks” but the actual cuase factor being GPS? “Bullocks”.