WATCHING THE WATCHERS

BY REBECCA MELNYK

Organizations across Canada have increasingly turned to surveillance technologies during the pandemic as a way to monitor their employees’ work behaviour.

Emerging digital innovations, including those used to collect sensitive biometric information like eye movements, facial muscles and tone of voice, are under growing scrutiny as remote work models are predicted to endure.

“This current entrenchment of worker surveillance is partially a consequence of cheaper and more available surveillance technology,” says Vass Bednar, executive director of the McMaster University’s Master of Public Policy and Digital Society program.

She was speaking at an event, hosted by the Cybersecure Policy Exchange at Ryerson University, which released its Workplace Surveillance and Remote Work report in October 2021. As it stands, there are few studies that examine workplace surveillance in Canada. This research builds on pre-existing findings and explores the impacts amidst COVID, revealing gaps and opportunities in the post-pandemic workplace.

Joe Masoodi, senior policy analyst at the Cybersecure Policy Exchange and lead author of the report, says although AI-driven technologies could lead to bias treatment, empirical research on impacts to marginalized and vulnerable communities is significantly lacking. “There’s also little in-depth research on the cybersecurity risks posed by surveillance technologies, despite the steep increase in cyber attacks on workplaces since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

A GROWING APPETITE TO SURVEIL

Companies like Hubstaff, Sneek, Prodoscore and TransparentBusiness reported an increase in customers between 400 and 600 per cent from March to June 2020. Emerging technologies, specifically AI-driven, are ushering in new ways to surveil, track employee behaviours and measure performance. Health data is also being monitored to track compliance with COVID-19 safety measures, such as social distancing.

This takes a toll on employee morale. Workers who perceive higher levels of on-the-job surveillance were found to exhibit more negative attitudes towards such measures. “And because there’s a power imbalance between employers and employees, that typically favours employers, workers may agree to surveillance measures in order to avoid potential consequences that a refusal may bring, such as retaliation or joblessness,” says Masoodi.

Closely monitoring employees is nothing new. Peggy Nash, chair of the advisory committee at the Centre for Labour Management Relations, says that as technology evolves, motives among managers remain consistent: to increase control, monetize data and capitalize on the information it brings.

“Technology is neutral,” she says. “It’s people who decide which technology is going to be used and how it’s going to be used. And for the most part, it is employers that decide. In many workplaces, workers have zero input, zero control.”

PRIVACY PRIORITIES

There are challenges with current employee privacy protections—a key message reverberating through the report. As Bednar says, despite employment standards that dictate vacation time, sick days and the hours one works, there is no labour legislation that protects people from technologies that automate tasks and “force an unhealthy pace of work” through algorithmic manipulation.

Technology is relying more on granular forms of data collection linked to AI and other analytics tools, such as emotion monitoring software to measure employee productivity, which is rife with potential gender and race biases.

Such technology is also creeping into homes as the border between work and personal life blurs, evidenced mainly through personal devices and networks for work-related activity.

“Canada’s current legal framework with respect to workplace surveillance provides employers with considerable leeway to surveil employees, so long as the surveillance is linked appropriately to employers interests and goals,” says Masoodi.

To make sure that workplace surveillance does not go beyond what is reasonable and appropriate, private sector employers will need guidance in the post-pandemic workplace to develop better policies on how such technologies are used remotely and in-person, he adds.

Greater regulatory enforcement is also crucial. As it stands, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) is not able to issue final binding orders of compliance or levy fines, even if it finds the entity in question has violated the provisions or principles set out in the federal Privacy Act or the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act [PIPEDA].

Unlike powers given to data protection authorities in the UK and Australia, the OPC doesn’t have the ability “to proactively inspect the practices of private sector organizations, in the absence of a complaint or open investigation.”

Organizations must balance the valid business interests of the company with employees’ reasonable expectations of privacy.

Jessica Kearsey, partner at Deloitte Legal Canada, says the legal language around privacy in the workplace, may be moving away from this “balancing of interests” to more of a human rights framework, as technology grows more omnipotent— extending beyond its original intent to the detriment of employees.

For instance, existing literature on the topic of ‘function creep’ shows how data collected about workers for one objective can be repurposed for other, more discriminatory uses.

In November 2020, the federal government proposed Bill C-11 as one concrete step towards privacy law reform. It would enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act (CPPA) and repeal parts of PIPEDA that concern protecting personal information.

Bill C-11 would also create the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal, which would both hear appeals of certain decisions from the OPC and impose penalties for the violation of certain provisions of the CPPA. The industry is hailing these changes as a step forward.

And there is also much to smooth out. After reviewing the legislation, the OPC stated that the provisions of the bill would actually give individuals less control; for instance, penalties would “not apply to the most common and frequent violations of the proposed CPPA related to consent.”

“This current entrenchment of worker surveillance is partially a consequence of cheaper and more available surveillance technology.”

EMPOWER OR DEPRIVE?

Besides the intrusive nature of surveillance, some have argued for its potential to detect burnout, thus empowering workers and resulting in wellness initiatives.

“I think technology can be very useful for both employers and employees, depending on context,” says Kearsey, pointing to high-risk workplaces with little supervision, such as the night shift on a 911 dispatch where PTSD is a known reality. As just one “part of the puzzle” to help flag safety issues, consulting with employees and a union on how to best use the technology is key, along with conversing with workers to understand the context behind the burnout, which extends beyond a particular shift.

Kirstie Ball, professor of management at the University of St. Andrews, in the U.K., says autonomy figures highly into how surveillance and empowerment intersect, if employees are given more control as technology intensifies.

Allow workers the ability to “opt out without being socially stigmatized for doing so,” she explains, and give them access to their performance data, so they can analyze and choose what the development needs are, in turn, offering those opportunities to them.

Also, crucial is inviting workers to question and participate in “ethically robust policies that govern surveillance,” and negotiating with them to create agreement over what was surveilled.

Within larger organizations fraught with invasive technology and nonunionized workers, Nash observes that it is still difficult to imagine surveillance as empowering.

While technology can make work more comfortable and easier, for instance, automation in place of backbreaking work, it is often “one-sided and negatively perceived outside of personal security situations.”

“It’s difficult to imagine positive scenarios, but there ought to be,” says Nash, adding that the development of technology, often funded by public dollars and capitalized by the private sector, should be used for the public good.

“And so much technology, generally, is used for the public good in medicine and vaccine production,” she notes. “But I think when it comes to surveillance, I struggle to see too many opportunities for positivity, from the perspective of workers.” | CFM&D

To access the full Workplace Surveillance and Remote Work report visit the Cybersecure Policy Exchange at https://www.cybersecurepolicy.ca/reports.

BY BARBARA CARSS

AESTHETIC TRADE-OFFS OF 5G ROLLOUT

Making buildings smarter could force some aesthetic trade-offs as the 5G rollout gets underway in commercial real estate. Midband and high-band spectrum carrying the next generation of digital telecommunications will need a boost from a proliferation of new antennas to infiltrate the dense structure and floorplan configurations of typical office and multi-residential towers.

Although distributed antenna systems (DAS) are already a staple of in-building wireless networks, they’re conveying data that’s riding on more invasive waves in the low band of the spectrum. Extra support will be needed when 5G services begin arriving via meeker travellers. Industry insiders are now tagging a potential clutter of small-cell antennas among the many factors to consider in 5G feasibility studies and implementation strategies.

“The higher spectrums don’t penetrate the buildings very well, especially with the new glass that’s used for energy efficiency. It reflects the radiofrequency signals. So carriers are going to have to deploy in-building networks that will be able to support 5G,” Maria Andonovsky, director of operational excellence with BentallGreenOak, noted during a webinar at the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) of Canada’s recent virtual annual conference. “How is that going to look visually in the building? I don’t think owners want these antennas splattered throughout the building. If there are multiple carriers in the building, aesthetics will be a major issue.”

Other properties of the mid and high bands — which are at various stages of regulatory release for telecom carriers’ use — are more optimally suited for 5G. Also participating in the webinar, Peter Leathley, director of technology strategy with Telus, stressed that speed, capacity and security are critical for the scale of smart, integrated technology it’s envisioned 5G will enable. Ultimately, that includes up to a million connected devices per square kilometre with consistently instantaneous timing between transmission and reception of data — a relay known as latency — to serve up the applications and assurance for a range of real-time analysis and response aligned with a smart future.

“Low latency is a must for future cloud networks and the current networks can’t support very low latency requirements,” Leathley said. “Another major consideration is cybersecurity. When millions of devices are connected wirelessly, the current networks cannot process the large amount of encrypted data at a fast enough rate.”

NO RUSH TO EARLY ADOPTION

For now, 5G rollout is at early stages and mostly still keeping company with 4G on the low band of the spectrum.

Andonovsky and Leathley sketched out some issues for owners/managers to think about in advance of the looming developments, with Leathley highlighting the upside of the promised transformative change and Andonovsky examining some of the practicalities of being an early adopter.

From an operational perspective, 5G is a means to take building automation, monitoring and controls to an enhanced level, opening up new predictive smart technologies like digital twin. From a market competitiveness perspective, Leathley suggests it’s an amenity than can underpin higher rental rates and increased asset value.

“We need smart buildings because demands on the built environment are changing. We need our buildings to be more sustainable, safer and competitive,” he submitted. “These are additive technologies that produce more capabilities as they go. We’re going to be talking about maybe changing how you do parking or changing how you do facilities management or bringing augmented reality capabilities to your tenants — working with you to change how people are using the office in a postCOVID environment.”

However, those should all be viewed as investments to be made on top of initial 5G implementation.

“Connectivity is one component of the costs,” Leathley reiterated. “You’ve got the physical infrastructure, the digital infrastructure in your building that’s really critical, but, beyond that, you have platforms and applications that leverage the network and those are other costs to consider.”

Andonovsky advises that prudent owners/managers will want to address everything from cost-sharing arrangements to cybersecurity vulnerabilities to the impact on the integrity of roof membranes before making a commitment. Consulting with tenants and other stakeholders will be key to forecasting demand for services, understanding operational requirements and calculating potential returns on investment. Given 5G’s current nascent stage, she deems there is time for thorough diligence and no real reason just yet to be the industry pioneer.

“We really just experience 5G (currently) where the carriers have deployed their cell sites and picocells and it seems like the deployment focus right now is in venues such as stadiums and malls where there are a lot more users,” she observed. “With commercial office buildings, there are concerns about being able to obtain 5G due to the spectrums being used and the amount of antennas that will need to be installed in the buildings. I believe owners will need to wait and watch and make their decisions based on cases that come to light over time.”

“I believe owners will need to wait and watch and make their decisions based on cases that come to light over time.”

THE CALL FOR NEUTRAL DISTRIBUTED ANTENNA SYSTEMS

For commercial buildings owners/ managers, prospects for a neutral or “agnostic” DAS could be a large piece of the decision-making puzzle. This would ensure that the potential clutter of antennas is minimized as all carriers use the same system, and would give landlords and tenants more flexibility in their dealings with carriers.

“It’s an ongoing conversation between building owners and the major telcos,” Andonovsky reported. “I don’t know that we’ve come up with a solution yet, but I think it’s something that we all want to work towards and it would be more efficient in the buildings to have that.”

Leathley affirmed that Telus is ensuring DAS are 5G-ready where they are newly installed. As mid-band spectrum becomes available, smallcell antennas can be added to meet system requirements, and they won’t necessarily look like the 4G-related antennas that Andonovsky likens to the size and shape of pizza boxes.

“We’re talking about an increased number of antennas, closer to people, as you get into that mid and high band,” Leathley said. “This will be done with equipment that is smaller and integrates more seamlessly into existing space.”

Nevertheless, any kind of retrofit can be cumbersome in older buildings that weren’t designed to accommodate modern telecommunications. “Some older buildings don’t have conduit or places to pull cable that are necessary for these antennas so that can be a challenge,” he acknowledged.

“Undertaking an audit of your existing buildings, understanding the systems you have in place, and some of the details around space for equipment and accessibility to conduit, are really good steps to get ready for deployment of small cells and 5G technology,” Leathley added.

Andonovsky concurs those steps have been part of her company’s strategic efforts to determine how 5G will fit into its operational and asset management agendas. She predicts commercial real estate owners/managers will approach 5G investment decisions in their customary manner.

“Owners embrace technology when they understand the impact to net operating income, the value improvement to the property and that the risks have all been addressed,” she said. | CFM&D

Barbara Carss is editor-in-chief of Canadian Property Management.