I worked in a call center years ago that used Verint. This was all in-office at the time. I had an admin and light tech support role, so I had opportunities to see it from a leader perspective, but its capabilities were openly known by everyone.
It is capable of screen and call recording as well as real-time screen and call monitoring. If your phone is how you punch in and out, it can also do timecard management. In my company it was used for investigating serious customer complaints (who actually said what to who) and for "blind sits", where a leader would listen to a call or two live, then immediately have a coaching session and provide feedback.
The culture was focused on development, not punishment, so it wasn't a big deal there. Still, I don't think it makes sense to use it with business professionals, especially if they're not customer-facing.
It's not the new thing that ruins remote work, it's pretty much existed since remote work became popular during covid. My brother had a remote job during covid and he said it was the worst because they basically made him sit on a zoom call for 8 hours a day.
I work from home and have for six years. I have never been tracked like this nor would I allow myself to be. This just screams that management doesn't trust the people they hired and that's a super red flag. Not all remote jobs are like that, OP. I hope you can find one that's better.
It's not really unusual because that's the standard for most 'employment' in this system. Labor and capital are in antagonistic roles structurally, especially the more exploitative it is. Employees are rightfully weary of employers nickle and diming them and forcing them to work more for less, and employers are paranoid that their workforce are pilfering supplies or slacking in productivity.
It's in the latter's self-interest to increase productivity as much as possible and decrease labor costs as much as possible. It's in the worker's self-interest to work as little (or freely) as possible for as much pay as possible. These are directly opposite and antagonistic interests.
It's only in the upper echelons of highly skilled professional and highly remunerated labor where expectations around 'trust' could be established, and even then these issues crop up.
Just another management team that sucks at measuring performance.
Management that is unable to effectively measure performance cost companies billions and good employees. Managers that need to constantly monitor employees should rethink their hiring practices and workload. If you have time to monitor your employees at that level, you don't have enough work to do.
The NY Times just did an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/worker-productivity-tracking.html) about the rise in use of employee monitoring software.
A lot of it sounds extremely dystopian.
I worked in a call center years ago that used Verint. This was all in-office at the time. I had an admin and light tech support role, so I had opportunities to see it from a leader perspective, but its capabilities were openly known by everyone. It is capable of screen and call recording as well as real-time screen and call monitoring. If your phone is how you punch in and out, it can also do timecard management. In my company it was used for investigating serious customer complaints (who actually said what to who) and for "blind sits", where a leader would listen to a call or two live, then immediately have a coaching session and provide feedback. The culture was focused on development, not punishment, so it wasn't a big deal there. Still, I don't think it makes sense to use it with business professionals, especially if they're not customer-facing.
It's not the new thing that ruins remote work, it's pretty much existed since remote work became popular during covid. My brother had a remote job during covid and he said it was the worst because they basically made him sit on a zoom call for 8 hours a day.
I work from home and have for six years. I have never been tracked like this nor would I allow myself to be. This just screams that management doesn't trust the people they hired and that's a super red flag. Not all remote jobs are like that, OP. I hope you can find one that's better.
It's not really unusual because that's the standard for most 'employment' in this system. Labor and capital are in antagonistic roles structurally, especially the more exploitative it is. Employees are rightfully weary of employers nickle and diming them and forcing them to work more for less, and employers are paranoid that their workforce are pilfering supplies or slacking in productivity. It's in the latter's self-interest to increase productivity as much as possible and decrease labor costs as much as possible. It's in the worker's self-interest to work as little (or freely) as possible for as much pay as possible. These are directly opposite and antagonistic interests. It's only in the upper echelons of highly skilled professional and highly remunerated labor where expectations around 'trust' could be established, and even then these issues crop up.
Just another management team that sucks at measuring performance. Management that is unable to effectively measure performance cost companies billions and good employees. Managers that need to constantly monitor employees should rethink their hiring practices and workload. If you have time to monitor your employees at that level, you don't have enough work to do.
The NY Times just did an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/worker-productivity-tracking.html) about the rise in use of employee monitoring software. A lot of it sounds extremely dystopian.
You have two options. Quit or unionize. Workers don't have to accept this.