can I ask interviewers whether they use employee surveillance tech?

by Alison Green on April 24, 2025

A reader writes:

The last time I was searching for jobs was pre-Covid, and while the job market and world have changed in many ways, one of the ways I’m most concerned about in my current search is the rise of employee monitoring technologies. I work in a field that has been primarily remote since well before the pandemic and has not been subjected my recent waves of return-to-office for that reason. I also live with a number of serious but very well-managed mental health issues that would quickly spiral out of “very well-managed” under the pressure of surveillance technologies. This isn’t just a preference not to work in an environment that uses these technologies but rather a real risk of triggering a psychotic episode. The combination of highly obsessive performance anxiety and the paranoia of surveillance is untenable for me given my particular slate of mental health conditions.

I have been and will remain in the regular care of a mental health team that I am confident would provide whatever I need to get accommodations in place if it came to that, but I’d prefer not to be in an environment where accommodations are even needed for this particular struggle. Is there a way to ask about whether or not an organization uses employee monitoring technology during an interview without either disclosing mental health conditions that I would rather not disclose or flagging myself as a potential slacker who doesn’t want supervisors catching on through monitoring software?

To be clear, I do NOT believe that people who don’t want to work under surveillance are “slackers,” but I worry that emphasizing the point too strongly in interviews might give hiring committees that impression and hurt my chances. I generally don’t think employers should monitor their workers to the extent that current technology allows for, but I also understand why making a big deal of that point might not look great to potential employers. But I worry, too, that handling this via accommodations would force me to reveal more than I would like about my mental health in the workplace.

Is there a graceful way to raise the question in interviews? Would it be better raised at the stage of an offer being made? Or is this something that I’d be best served just waiting out and then getting accommodations in place if the need arises? I welcome any advice that you or your readers might have for how to handle this!

Yeah, this is a rough thing to raise in an interview without coming across strangely.

In theory, it shouldn’t be that way! There are loads of reasons for people not to be interested in companies that surveil their every keystroke — such as believing that it reflects a culture and management style not aligned with how they want to work — but it’s still going to be very difficult to raise it in an interview without seeming oddly and inordinately focused on it. The same goes for asking about things like drug testing; there are plenty of good reasons not to want to work somewhere that drug tests, even if you’re not a drug user yourself, but asking about it in the interview will Create An Impression.

You should be able to ask in an interview about anything that’s important to you without worrying about what subtext interviewers will read into it … but in reality, you can’t.

Of course, the reverse is true, too — there are questions an interviewer could ask that would really turn off candidates — but the power dynamics are so different that it’s not the same thing.

You could of course ask what they’ve found effective in managing a remote team and where the challenges have been, and that could lead to an interesting discussion that reveals something relevant about their philosophy … but it’s very unlikely that they’ll announce, “Oh, and we use keystroke loggers and take screenshots of your monitor every 10 minutes.”

So unfortunately, the best time to raise it is after you have a job offer — when they’ve already decided they want to hire you and have extended you an offer, because at that point the hiring decision can’t be influenced by the question and they can’t pull your offer over you merely asking the question without violating the Americans with Disability Act. Even then, I’m struggling with how to word it, since it’s an unusual request. It might be useful to talk with your medical team about the best way to frame it so that you don’t reveal more than you need to. (And if they’re no help, an employment lawyer should be able to advise on the right way to word it.)

You may also like:
{ 103 comments }

{ 103 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. en dee*

    Could OP ask, at the offer stage, to speak with an employee / a member of their team to get a feel for workplace culture, and then ask the team member about company methods for monitoring employee performance? I think this could be worded without any reference to a health condition.

    Reply ↓
    1. kanada*

      my worry with that would be that I’ve known plenty of employers who don’t disclose the use of that kind of thing at all, or who give a general notice that there is monitoring in place without clarifying the nature or level.

      Reply ↓
      1. Ellen N.*

        I agree with you. The place that I worked that installed employee surveillance didn’t tell the employees.

        The employees found out when an employee was fired for using 25% of her workday on her personal life.

        Reply ↓
        1. Michelle*

          Wow. Sounds like they’re only managing by using tech. What if the manager asked the employee to not do any personal business while on the clock, and she complied? Problem solved, and no one needs to be fired.

          Reply ↓
          1. Ellen N.*

            They switched from offices to an open floor plan so that they could “see if people were working or goofing off”.

            They forbade any personal use of their office equipment: phones, copier, etc.

            They also forbade employees from using their cell phones during office hours.

            If an employee needed to take a personal call, the receptionist was instructed to have the caller speak to a partner so the partner could decide if the call was important.

            The employee who was fired knew these policies. She believed herself to be the exception.

            Reply ↓
                1. Religious Nutter*

                  The longer I read the “Ask a Manager” comments section, the more I’m sure I’ll never work for a law firm.

            2. Alpacas Are Not Dairy Animals*

              Yikes. There are jobs where someone working them is necessarily unreachable in an emergency, of course, but making people arbitrarily unreachable in an emergency (or at least unreachable until they track down a partner – who presumably has other work too! – and explain a situation they may know nothing about) seems unkind.

              Reply ↓
          1. a bright young reporter with a point of view*

            Or it’s even worse once they do find out. That would make me feel pretty sick and I don’t have particularly serious anxiety or anything in that realm.

            Reply ↓
    2. Ally McBeal*

      A rank-and-file employee probably won’t know. Like, I’m aware that my employer-issued laptop occasionally pops up a little icon indicating that my location is being tracked, and I assume they’re passively monitoring all my internal and external communications, but I have no idea to what extent or how, or if there are other forms of surveillance.

      I feel sympathy for OP but the reality is that we’re all being tracked in ways and by entities we’ll never be aware of. Internet cookies scare me a lot more than a keystroke logger installed by my employer.

      Reply ↓
    3. CubeFarmer*

      Honestly, if I had a potential new colleague ask about trackers or other types of monitoring, I would definitely report it to someone in charge of hiring. It would raise a red flag with me (the thinking being, if you’re working remotely and you’re being productive, then why the worry?)

      Reply ↓
  2. bamcheeks*

    LW, are you going for jobs with a line-management component? Because I think if you take the attitude that as a manager, using surveillance technology would not align with your style or cultural preferences, that’s a less flaggy thing to say to people who don’t use it.

    I realise this isn’t much help if you’re looking for IC roles, but if you are looking for management roles I think it would be quite reasonable to tell organisations that you’re screening out potential employers who would require you to use or monitor surveillance technology.

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      I’m unfortunately not currently looking at jobs with managing components, but I will probably be angling that way eventually in the future, so this will be good to have in mind whenever that day comes! It even has the benefit of being very true–this would be out of alignment with my management style, and I’d want to ask about that for that reason. Thank you!

      Reply ↓
  3. Emma*

    If you’re applying for a managerial role, might it be more acceptable to ask the question in that context? Something like, “I aim to avoid micromanaging my team; I prefer to run a team with a high degree of trust. I find it difficult to achieve this if there are surveillance technologies in place. Does [company] use these?”

    It might still raise alarm bells, but less so, I think. It wouldn’t help for non-managerial roles, though.

    Reply ↓
    1. tw1968*

      A GREAT way to bring this up–not only saying you run your team with a lot of trust, but add that you are *Results Oriented*. If your team gets work done, meets deadlines, and so on, then managing by “mouse movement” is stupid and the manager is an idiot.

      And I think it’s a good question to ask as a non manager. “Do you manage by making sure everyone is actively typing/moving mouse/etc during every moment of the day when they’re not at lunch or on breaks, or do you give people the tools, training and support they need to succeed and give them the freedom to do their job?”

      Reply ↓
  4. Snarkus Aurelius*

    Maybe I’m missing something here…

    I get that monitoring every keystroke, taking screenshots every ten minutes or monitoring mouse activity are all overkill and very 1984. I oppose real-time monitoring for no reason.

    But you’re never going to find an employer that doesn’t monitor employees’ online activity on company-issued devices in some way. The legal liability is far too great.

    I know of multiple people who have watched porn at work, and that is absolutely not okay with me. I don’t care if I never have to see it. I don’t want an employee to watch Netflix or Hulu all day while doing nothing and draining bandwidth. Employees should never use company devices to engage in illegal activity like wire fraud or scams. If someone is using email or Teams to harass one of my employees, you’d better believe I’m asking to monitor that person’s online activity and ask for access to that information to use it to fire the perpetrator.

    We simply don’t live in a world where adults at work are going to wander around the Internet in a company-approved way of their own volition. You’ll always have one George Costanza type doing something illegal or that risks legal liability but claiming they didn’t know they weren’t supposed to do something like watching OnlyFans over the lunch hour.

    I understand you have a psychological condition, and I don’t doubt the reality of living with it. But asking not to be monitored in any way on a device that doesn’t belong to you is a very risky thing to request.

    Reply ↓
    1. Michelle*

      All of the things you mentioned are usual ways that businesses protect their interests and their network security, and they’re not the same as constant surveillance.

      Reply ↓
    3. Liz the Snackbrarian*

      The kind of stuff you’ve listed is approximately what a lot of people would consider standard. I also don’t know that it falls under constant surveillance. Hard to know for sure but I think LW is referring to measures more extreme than all of that when they say constant surveillance.

      Reply ↓
    4. Tea Monk*

      Hm there’s a huge difference between knowing that with cause they could ask IT to see what youve been doing versus the sort of surveillance that we think of when we talk about that. Yes IT could see that I used a thesaurus on a work computer but it’s not likely for them to actually see that

      Reply ↓
        1. Tea Monk*

          Yea I have an anxiety disorder and if something is not likely to happen it’s easier to talk myself down than if it’s actually happening.

          Reply ↓
    5. Mentally Spicy*

      The letter writer is clearly talking about the sort of digital “looking over the employee’s shoulder” real-time monitoring, where a supervisor can see at a glance who’s working on what. Website logging doesn’t fall in that category.

      There’s a tone to your comment that, whether you mean it or not, suggests you think the LW wants to have free rein to do whatever they want on company devices which I don’t believe is the case.

      Reply ↓
      1. Snarkus Aurelius*

        I don’t think that at all. What I’m saying and struggling with are the specifics of what the LW is concerned about. In my mind, there’s a huge distinction between real-time monitoring and pulling activity logs when there’s a problem.

        Reply ↓
    6. ThatGirl*

      Everywhere I’ve worked in my adult life is not *actively* monitoring every employee every day, there simply aren’t the resources for that in many cases. (Might be easier now with AI, but still.) So sure, IT could pull up my Teams chat log or my emails sent or whatever if they wanted to, but they generally are not doing that unless my manager/someone else requests that they do, because they have some reason to.

      Reply ↓
    7. .*

      there’s a difference between blocking a porn site or knowing that the company could read my emails if they wanted to and someone monitoring my teams status to see how long i’ve been idle or installing software to track my mouse movements/keystrokes or whatever else in an attempt to gauge productivity.

      i’m fine with the first sort of monitoring – i don’t do anything on my work computer that i wouldn’t want my manager to show the whole department. but the second type would open me up to a lot of paranoia – did i just take too long in the bathroom? am i spending too long reading this piece of documentation to understand it? is everyone else way more productive than me? i’m having a slow day, so am i going to get in trouble?

      Reply ↓
    8. DramaQ*

      I believe the letter writer is talking about things like mouse trackers that are recording how many times you use it or tracking how many keystrokes you are making per hour based on assumption that you must be typing every minute of the day.

      My husband is remote and yes they track but is a behind the scenes thing. It’s recording if they are on during work hours. It tracks what types of sites they are on.

      So yeah if someone was looking at porn IT could see it and flag it. Someone got fired when they looked at her hours logged on the computer vs her actual work output and questioned what she was doing.

      My computer tracks what I do in the background but it only becomes an issue if they suspect something then yes IT can go through my history.

      Neither of us are getting emails from managers asking why his mouse wasn’t moving or why did you only log 15 keystrokes today when our algorithm says you should be doing 50 keystrokes a day?

      Those types of monitoring were suggested by micromanagers who felt that nobody could possibly be productive being remote but were shot down by the younger CEO who told them that is the fastest way to lose employees. If we trusted them in office without mouse trackers we are going to trust them remotely. The work output (which has always been tracked) speaks for itself and will reveal who is putting in time and who is not.

      I just don’t know how you would ask it. I think asking what types of strategies have you found effective in regards to managing employees would potentially be useful. It frames it as you want to know their managerial style which is a reasonable question to ask because you want to know if you will gel with the team.

      Reply ↓
    9. LW*

      Yep, I am asking specifically about surveillance technologies like keylogging and constant screenshots and having the webcam on at all times that increased so much with the pandemic shift. I mean this as kindly as possible, but I of course understand that all companies have some form or other of technology monitoring softwares, having been employed in remotely in this field for quite a while and employed generally for even longer. There’s a substantive difference between those kinds of monitoring technologies, which you yourself acknowledge, and I am asking about the former here.

      Reply ↓
      1. Liz*

        I don’t think it would be a red flag to start out with the initial question of how they manage remote employees, and then follow up with a question like: I know in our field, there is a lot of debate around active vs passive monitoring of remote employees. What is your agency’s current stance on that debate? I think the more you frame it as a dispassionate philosophical discussion around culture, the less it would be seen as a red flag.

        Reply ↓
        1. LW*

          Thank you! Another commenter suggested a similar approach, and I do think that framing it around dispassionate philosophy and curiosity about changing workplace norms feels like a safe way to probe this. I’ll definitely want to practice actually coming across as dispassionate in the moment, but, now that I have that advice, it’s something I can start working towards :)

          Reply ↓
      2. Gudrid The Well-Traveled*

        As part of the management style conversation you could ask if cameras are required to be on for meetings. It may not tell you anything concrete, but you’re going to have to make a lot of assumptions based on phrases, facial expressions, and vibes.

        Reply ↓
    10. Ellis Bell*

      I think it’s important to distinguish between the type of monitoring that protects against actively misusing technology, and the kind that is purely surveillance of how much time is spent actively working. With the former, there should be a clear policy about internet usage coupled with monitoring that wouldn’t go near setting off the OP’s main concerns of “highly obsessive performance anxiety and the paranoia of surveillance”. I get it. I once had a boss let me know she was actively watching me on camera and even though I was always very busy, the strain of never being able to catch your breath, or signal that you’re on lunch and not goofing around is pretty horrible.

      Reply ↓
      1. LW*

        Oof, that’s honestly my worst nightmare! Knowing you’re being watched constantly creates such an intense psychological pressure. I’m always surprised that anybody would think that kind of monitoring would increase productivity rather than rapidly drive workers to either leave the company or totally burn out.

        Reply ↓
    11. Beth*

      There’s a big difference between passive monitoring–which is what most companies do, they can access your browsing and etc if they have reason to need to for security reasons but no one is looking at it on a day-to-day basis–and the kind of active employee surveillance that OP is talking about. If you don’t see a difference between “I got in trouble when IT realized my problem was caused by a virus I’d n, they looked into it and realized I’ve been watching porn all day” vs “My manager is actively monitoring every keystroke,” you might not have helpful advice for OP.

      Reply ↓
    12. June*

      Agree. It’s only going to raise suspicions. And offers can be rescinded. Not every condition requires legal accommodations and company may be a hard no on opting out of equipment surveillance for security purposes. Especially in any kind of financial or health care job.

      Reply ↓
    13. TGIF*

      Hmmm I work from home, I’m using my own bandwidth, and often have a tv show or a movie, or music running WHILE I’m working. I really don’t think my work monitors every move and of course I don’t look at porn or anything insane like that, but if I want to have a movie or music going in the background I’m going to.

      Reply ↓
  5. television*

    A phrasing that might work for a job like mine: “I really value being able to work independently, and do my best work in workplaces that allow flexibility. For example, being available during core hours, but finishing my workday at an odd time if I need to step out for part of the day. Can you tell me more about how the company/the team handles productivity metrics?”

    As the conversation goes on, and if there’s a rapport with the interviewer, I might even say something like, “Honestly I find tools like keyloggers and those periodic screenshot tools really creepy. No one needs to see how long I take to do the crossword during lunch!” Just as a way to signal in a fairly friendly way what I actually care about here.

    YMMV but as a software developer and a friendly person, I think I could say those things and get an OK response. Wanting privacy isn’t unexpected for this industry. Would probably need to dig in a little bit on whatever answer is given to that first foray, though.

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      This is a really helpful framing, thank you so much! I’m in a line of work that tends to be known for a lot of flexibility and independent work time, interspersed with occasional training and facilitation-type responsibilities, so asking about flexibility/how appointments and errands are managed during the work day would be unlikely to raise any flags. I really appreciate this!

      Reply ↓
      1. Mentally Spicy*

        It strikes me that the response you get by asking the question will tell you a huge amount about the company culture in general.

        You have my sympathies. It sucks for those of us that fall outside of the “9-5” mindset. Since becoming a freelancer I’ve discovered that my preferred working hours are 9am-1pm, break to deal with household and kids-based chores, then another shift from 8pm to midnight. Those hours work for me and are when I’m at my most productive. Yet they are WAY outside of the normal work culture.

        I think there are some progressive companies who are waking up to the reality that every worker is different and has different needs to get the job done. And they can adjust to the individual employee’s preferred way of working, rather than treating all employees as identical robots. It’s a very slow process though.

        I wish you good luck.

        Reply ↓
      2. AthenaC*

        Or even conventions around how people communicate availability, etc. At my company people can look at each other’s calendars and see that at, say, 10 am on Wednesday, XYZ manager is at a meeting / at a client / has a personal appointment and is Not Available Right Now. So you either need to wait, send them an email, or find someone else.

        On the other hand, when it’s 10 pm CST and I need some help, I’ll reach out to the partner in California who I know works late and sure enough, he’s around and willing to chat. So it goes both ways.

        And that’s just the culture in my company of working around each other. Probably won’t get you the answer to your surveillance question but probably still good to know.

        Reply ↓
    2. Reba*

      ITA that you should be able to ask about this in the context of working styles, flexibility and team management. It should be necessary at all to disclose your disability. I also would not want to work in a low-trust high-surveillance workplace, if I could avoid it.

      Reply ↓
    3. Bigbrotheriswatching*

      I totally agree. I have mentioned it “off-handedly” (strategically, but not seeming that way) when the interview turns to discussions around work flexibility or work/life balance. I’ve been able to work in more than once that my current company actively monitors keystrokes and badge swipes (requiring certain metrics be met weekly on both even for salaried positions) and that it feels like overkill for the type of work that I do. You find out quickly if they seem shocked by that or whether they are unphased.
      If they think it is a normal or good practive, it is an indicator that I probably don’t want to move forward in their hiring process.

      Reply ↓
  6. AndersonDarling*

    I would ask the extreme question so they can explain they (hopefully) aren’t that intrusive.
    “I know companies are still getting comfortable with remote work, and I’ve heard about extremes where companies require cameras on 24/7, keystroke monitoring, and surveillance of personal social media. Is this that kind of environment?”
    “Oh Jez, no! That would be terrible! We have cameras on for meetings, that’s it. And we track the work being produced to judge how well an employee is succeeding.”

    Reply ↓
    1. Georgina Sands*

      Yeah, this seems reasonable to me, I wouldn’t think negatively of a candidate who asked this. I guess a company where they did all that might, but I suppose that’s what you want!

      Reply ↓
    2. jobbyjob*

      Oh this is really smart and I really like this phrasing! Especially safe to ask at the offer stage this way I think.

      Reply ↓
    3. AthenaC*

      I might even mention the other extreme as well (no supervision, unresponsive teammates during crunch time) and gauge their reaction. Because unless you have the kind of job where you are an island and nothing is ever time-sensitive, I would think you would care about a good work ethic among your teammates.

      Plus I think if you ask a question mentioning both extremes, that shows your interviewer that you care about being productive and effective primarily and you want an environment conducive to that. Which would make you a good employer’s dream employee.

      Reply ↓
      1. Sar*

        this is smart. I would definitely do both. Thinking about it, I would mention the “scary surveillance” end of things first and “everyone out to lunch” end of things second because I think doing the latter first, unless you’re going for a management position, would come across as brown-noser-y and potentially likely to be up in your colleagues’ business when you shouldn’t be.

        Reply ↓
    4. Hroethvitnir*

      Hmm, yeah I think I’d soften it a bit, but I overall like this.

      I’ve so far been bemused by the number of commenters who *do* seem to find it suspicious – whereas my response was “surely nobody is completely comfortable with constant surveillance”. It’s fairly obvious the issue is not with having tools in place to check if needed.

      Reply ↓
  7. Trudy's Blue Summer's Dress*

    This is a tough one, because usually I’d say you should ask about any dealbreakers right away. But with this, I think that even at companies where they don’t use these, it’s not going to come off well.

    I don’t think there’s any way to raise this early in the process without raising an eyebrow or two

    Reply ↓
  8. IT Guy*

    Company technology management software is a security requirement for cyber insurance and good security practice. This software is mostly used for deploying company security policies and software. Could we use it to track how the computer is being used, yes. Do we use it to track computer history to the minute for performance evaluations, no. I have better things to do with my time and if there is a performance issue it’s between the manager and the employee.

    As others have stated. The question I would want my potential manager to answer is, “How is performance evaluated?” Not whether software is used in tracking it, because you as the employee wouldn’t know if it’s being used to just manage the computer or spy on you.

    Reply ↓
    1. Hexiv*

      I mean, it’s not that the LW has a philosophical problem with management software, it’s that they know that its presence will trigger their mental health issues, a thing they’re understandable trying to avoid. So whether or not there’s a valid reason for the employer to use such software is kind of besides the point.

      Reply ↓
      1. IT Guy*

        My point is assume the software is there, even if management doesn’t think they have it. However, verify with management how performance is evaluated.

        Reply ↓
    2. Snarkus Aurelius*

      This right here.

      I don’t have the time or inclination to monitor every email or website my staff visit. But when there are performance issues or a PIP is needed, I require that information to address the root problem. And I always need to know if my staff visit an inappropriate website or conduct themselves inappropriately over chat, email, and text.

      I can’t think of a single attorney or IT security person who will recommend *no* online monitoring in some way. The legal liability alone would be astronomical.

      Reply ↓
    3. a perfectly normal-sized space bird*

      We have a few clients who require employees working on their projects to be live on camera during the work day. All but one client requires it because the data we work with is sensitive and they need to follow regulations about security. All those clients are interested in is whether employees are working from an area that can be considered secure. If someone is clearly working in a Starbucks then it’s a security issue, not a performance issue (though someone repeatedly doing that then becomes a performance issue). They need to be able to prove the data is secure.

      The data for non-camera clients is no less sensitive but the regulations where they’re located aren’t as strict. If a candidate asked about employee surveillance, I doubt info about the live cameras would even come up. They’d likely just get an answer about how our software measures output and basic timekeeping.

      Reply ↓
    4. LW*

      I am not asking about the kind of general technology monitoring software that is and has been standard-to-required across industries for a very long time now but the kinds of remote monitoring softwares that saw a big uptick in COVID, like the “your webcam has to be on all the time and will randomly snap pictures” or “we actively log your keystrokes and mouse activity” technologies. There’s a pretty major difference in my view! That difference being that the former is normal and an important security measure and the latter is invasive, demoralizing, and also could dramatically impact my health.

      Reply ↓
      1. Hroethvitnir*

        I think you were clear! I would be a far worse performing, miserable wreck if I felt actively watched constantly (anytime is effectively constant). Having the ability to look through logs of your emails/messages/browsing if required isn’t even a little similar imo!

        Reply ↓
    5. Great Frogs of Literature*

      There’s a difference between “my employer would know if my computer accessed a malware site” and “my employer takes screenshots of what I’m doing every X seconds.” The first one is a fine and reasonable security practice. So is computer management software that enforces OS updates. (Even if they decide they need to happen RIGHT NOW when I’m about to log into an important meeting.)

      But nobody wants to live in a panopticon. I don’t have any significant mental health struggles, and feeling like I was being digitally watched all day would make me stressed and anxious.

      Reply ↓
  9. Maxwell Perkins*

    This is another situation where I think LW is bringing their health/disability into a situation where anyone could share those concerns–it doesn’t need to be about mental health to just not want it. I’d ask how they assess effort/performance, then wait till there’s an offer and say you’re being careful with digital privacy in your home and can they share what kinds of employee monitoring they generally use. (That wouldn’t work for an in-office job, but I think it’s reasonable to ask how the company might be monitoring your home without sounding like a crazy person.)

    Reply ↓
    1. Paint N Drip*

      Good point, it is a totally normal and fairly universal concern. OP, I would find those monitors/loggers intrusive and unnecessary, and it has nothing to do with my mental health SO you can release any fear that asking about it will shine a spotlight on your health!

      Reply ↓
    2. LW*

      My mental health/disability status obviously isn’t important to the general question of “how do I ask about remote software”… but it’s pretty critical context to my circumstances, and those are the circumstances I’m looking for advice about. This being a medical need and not a preference impacts the timeline I would need to handle these questions on and the avenues that are open to me for handling the issue. I didn’t know, for example, that the ADA would be applicable to a job offer (I thought it would only apply if I accepted the offer and was employed at the company). That’s extremely helpful and pertinent information for me to have. Allison’s general advice here IS helpful and applicable to those with and without mental health concerns, but it also includes specifics about the disability side of things that will help me navigate this and, quite literally, protect my sanity while I job search.

      Also, I know you probably didn’t mean it this way, but reassuring me that I won’t sound like “a crazy person” for asking this is… well, that’s some pretty tough phrasing, considering the circumstances.

      Reply ↓
      1. Cmdrshprd*

        “they can’t pull your offer over you merely asking the question without violating the Americans with Disability Act. ”

        IANAL but as I understand if you just asked the question but didn’t disclose your disability they could pull the offer without violating the ADA. Aka if they pull the offer because they think your question makes you seem like a slacker that would be fine.

        But if you disclose your disability as the reason for asking and/or asking for an accommodation, at that point they can’t pull the offer without violating the ADA.

        Reply ↓
    3. LW*

      Hi–apologies if this ends up being a double comment–I tried to reply but it looks like it didn’t go through.

      I appreciate what you’re saying, but the mental health and disability aspect of this IS pretty critical to me here. This isn’t a matter of preference but of medical necessity, and that means I need to approach it more seriously and, potentially, more directly. It also means that things like timelines are different: this is something I really do need to determine before I accept a position. Even if this can be handled by accommodation, that accommodation would be very revealing in and of itself, and I’d like to avoid that if possible. It’s also not something I could just stick out for a little while if I found myself in a job where surveillance technology was being used until I found something that worked better for me–if I find myself in a position where this technology is being used but for some reason am unable to get a workable accommodation in place, I sincerely would have to quit whether or not I had another job lined up, and I’d really like to avoid that. Most importantly, though, the potential ways I have of handling this issue are different with a disability in play than without. I did not know, for example, that the ADA would apply to job offers and thought it only applied once I had accepted a job. This is really helpful for me to know, and being able to get this sort of advice is the exact reason that I provided the context of my mental health. Just because the disability piece is irrelevant to you doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant to me or to the advice in general!

      Also–I know you probably meant this differently than it comes across, but reassuring me that I can ask about this issue without sounding like “a crazy person” feels pretty rough under the circumstances… but it does also really underscore why I’d like to keep this situation under wraps as much as possible. Unfortunately, I don’t know how possible that might be, which is also why I want to make sure I’m prepared to handle this with a medical approach if softball approaches fail.

      That all said, I definitely appreciate your advice about home privacy concerns! That’s something I’ll keep in mind and in my back pocket for if/when the topic comes up in interviews!

      Reply ↓
    4. DramaQ*

      I am not going to arm chair diagnose the LW but there are clinical mental illnesses out there that can be affected by the constant awareness/thought that someone is watching you with unseen eyes for most of the day.

      I would consider it invasive, exhausting and be looking for a new job ASAP but I do not have to worry about my currently controlled mental health taking a nose dive from being monitored.

      People with those conditions have just as much right to live and work as I do. If they say it would be crippling to work under that kind of surveillance who am I to say they are exaggerating and we “all” have this problem?

      It is like saying everyone is a little bit OCD or ADHD or autistic. So what does this bother you? Why do you need accommodations everyone else just deals with it.

      Sure we all have habits that appear on various DSM lists but you have to meet a certain threshold to get a clinical diagnosis and even then there is a spectrum. If the LW says it is critical to their mental health to not be surveyed we should believe them.

      Reply ↓
      1. Hroethvitnir*

        Sure we all have habits that appear on various DSM lists but you have to meet a certain threshold to get a clinical diagnosis and even then there is a spectrum.

        I love this! I’ve never found a pithy way to communicate this, and I’m keeping your phrasing in my back pocket now, thank you.

        Reply ↓
  10. Fool's Gold*

    There should be a feature on Glassdoor (or a better, more anonymous version of it) where people can report this.

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      Could not agree more, both re: this being a Glassdoor feature… and someone out there making a more anonymous version of Glassdoor!

      Reply ↓
  11. LW*

    Thank you for taking the time to answer this! Although being able to smoothly ask about monitoring software in an interview without raising flags would be ideal, it definitely makes sense that it’s the kind of thing that I can try to indirectly glean during the interview stage but only more directly broach if an offer is made.

    Reply ↓
  12. a number, not a name*

    I wonder what kind of surveillance tech we’re talking about here, and what industry.

    My campus has cameras all around the exterior of every building. Our security department uses facial recognition software on the back-end to identify and alert on known trespassers whenever they enter the campus. We also have access badges, and keep a log of everyone’s badge use. We also keep a log of everyone’s network use. We also watch for attempts to access prohibited websites.

    It’s common nowadays for department stores to have cameras everywhere, and especially overlooking the cashiers.

    And of course we all know about more granular, micro-managing type stuff like keyloggers and mouse trackers.

    I dunno if knowing that there’s a lot more surveillance going on than you might think makes things even worse, or if it helps to ameliorate the concern. Either way, I hope it works out well for this job search.

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      Honestly, I’m finding the number of commenters that don’t seem to realize which technologies I’m talking about pretty reassuring–it indicates to me that these technologies aren’t as widespread as I worried they might be! The switch to remote working during the pandemic saw a rise in remote monitoring technologies that do things like continuously monitor your keystrokes and mouse movements, take screenshots of your desktop every ten minutes, or even technologies that trigger webcam pictures at certain intervals throughout the day. The standard surveillance of the modern world is a stressor to me but one I navigate pretty well, and that level of workplace surveillance is also something I can manage without real issue. It’s just those very invasive technologies that cultivate the feeling that I’m constantly being not just watched but monitored with intense focus in my own home that I’m worried about.

      Reply ↓
  13. Sparrow*

    OP, I have schizophrenia and I completely, 100% feel you on this. One thing to consider: would it be possible to bring it up in a way that frames it as a technology question rather than one of surveillance, maybe bundled up in one or two other questions about the tech? I’m thinking something like: “Do employees on this team get equipment from the company, or does everyone use their own? [Wait for answer] Got it, okay! Can you tell me anything about the expected set-up—any programs that are mandatory to install, required specs, etc?” I suspect how well this will come across will vary a lot depending on the field you’re in, but I think it could work if you frame it right!

    Or, one other alternative: this is, again, dependent on field, but I wonder if you could ask about surveillance while adapting Alison’s “This is a weird thing of mine” strategy here? My field is very tech-adjacent, and I absolutely know people who are openly anti-surveillance but who manage to make it work in such a way that it just comes across as a slightly-unusual quirk. From what I’ve seen, it helps to take a lighthearted “Yeah, sorry, I’m just really weird about surveillance technology!” stance (even though it really is not weird and you shouldn’t have to apologize, but as Alison has noted before, this sort of strategy can be effective in getting people to accept boundaries they may otherwise find unworkably strange).

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      This is actually so helpful–thank you so much! The nature of my job makes asking those technology questions pretty easy and natural, and I think your adaptation of the “this is a weird thing of mine” approach could also work pretty well in my space! I would describe my field as likewise being very tech-adjacent, with people in my specific role tending to be known for a degree of privacy and independence, so it probably isn’t too unusual for people to have similar “quirks.”

      On a more personal note, while I obviously hate to hear that you also have your own mental health challenges to deal with, it’s really comforting to be reminded that there are other people out there who are dealing with the same or very similar struggles. I think invasive workplace surveillance is bad for everyone, honestly, don’t get me wrong–but you really never hear people talking about some of the more serious mental health challenges it can pose. It’s always good to be reminded that, no matter how specific a struggle might feel, there are a lot of other people out there trying to navigate the same things!

      Reply ↓
  14. Mad Scientist*

    Genuinely curious – Do companies ever openly admit to using this stuff? I honestly assumed they all use it and simply don’t tell people. I’d have a hard time believing their answer to this question even if asked.

    Reply ↓
    1. David*

      Personally, I’ve seen enough of how corporate IT setups work under the hood to be quite sure there are companies out there which do not use this level of surveillance tech (like video monitoring). If nothing else, tech companies often have enough employees who would recognize the telltale signs that they couldn’t keep it secret for very long. At other companies which don’t have so many technical-expert employees, maybe it’s more plausible they could keep it hidden, but even then there could be managers or IT people in the know who wouldn’t be comfortable with it and might blow the whistle or drop hints, or even just accidentally let something slip as part of idle gossip.

      And I’d guess that some of the companies who do use invasive surveillance tech will disclose it, in some form, out of concern for wiretapping laws or something like that. Maybe not proudly announcing it, it might be buried in the middle of the employee handbook, but the information would be there.

      Reply ↓
    2. Bigbrotheriswatching*

      Yes, my company is very upfront about it and how intrusive it is. It is designed to scare you into never leaving the office or your desk, honestly. We are expected to be “actively working” (typing, mouse-clicks, teams meeting, etc. for over 7 hours per day and it registers every 15 seconds). We are supposed to have badge swipes showing we are in-office for over 8 hours per day. This is a 40,000 employee company. And no, I am not in a call center or data entry. I am in a product management position that is supposed to be salary. The tracking software does not care if I need to head to the production floor or have a conversation with someone at my desk that isn’t happening on my screen. It is very demoralizing and is making me actively job search.

      Reply ↓
  15. bookluvrb*

    It’s probably a bad question for an interview…because the interviewer might not know. I know what my employer can LEGALLY see on the work computers, but I don’t know what they have the ABILITY to check (beyond a comment from our one and only IT person that “I’m not wasting time on that crap.”). If an interviewee brought it up, it would lead to a bunch of follow-up through departments that wouldn’t usually be involved in hiring at my level.

    I wonder if it would be better to wait and do it as an accommodation, since then anyone who needs to be consulted would know that it needs to be handled delicately.

    Reply ↓
  16. ICU*

    You can configure your home internet – account, router, firewall, whatever you have – to block keyloggers and trackers and the like and block traffic to those sites. Being on a company VPN will get around most of those settings though, but if you are not connected to it you should be able to see pretty quickly whether they are in use or the company IT will be calling asking to “check something on your computer”

    The point about always on cameras is a good one, and I would go with framing the question as about company culture and management around remote work in general to find out information about that. I have friends at companies that are always on video and that would be a nightmare to me. I also have worked with a manager who tracked their team via the microsoft teams status light, which is notoriously inaccurate.

    I have worked in IT and have been required to place invasive tracking software on people’s machines before. Most of the time we would push back against the request in favor of less invasive means, but sometimes we had to do it and never liked it. A healthy company will be able to measure productivity by other means, and if someone can get do 8 hours of work correctly within a 6 hour time frame, then there should not be an issue with lower activity for the other 2 hours if they remain generally available. Or in the case of people who do a lot of “thinking work” or outreach on calls, there are many times you will not be actively on a computer but will very much be working.

    Of course if you are in the EU or other places where they actually take privacy seriously, your life is much better and you generally don’t have to worry about this mess.

    Reply ↓
    1. ICU*

      But also, it is likely that whomever you are speaking with will not know about the more invasive tools available to upper management or IT. Only IT and HR and the C-suite at my company know what of those are available. The other side is they may honestly not use it now but randomly decide one day to install that on machines without telling anyone. Blocking it on your side is a potential solution or at least may give you a measure of control or knowledge.

      The always on camera or other more obvious tracking items that managers routinely use may be more helpful information about the culture in general.

      Reply ↓
    2. LW*

      Thank you for this! Honestly, even knowing I have the ability to configure my home internet settings to block out some of the more invasive technologies (even just to figure out if those technologies might be in place by getting that IT call) is a weight off my mind. Ideally, I wouldn’t find myself in that position at all–but life isn’t ideal, and I’d always rather be prepared for the less-than-ideal possibilities than just hope they won’t come to pass!

      Reply ↓
  17. AnnaMaria Alberghetti Spaghetti*

    At my last job, my director had no qualms about making it very obvious that my work area was being openly monitored. He could have claimed “safety purposes” if I would have pressed him but my area was the most boring possible, apart from my working there. It was such an affront to … ME. He never caught me doing anything worth mentioning.

    I’m so glad I’m not there anymore.

    Reply ↓
  18. HannahS*

    You could consider including something along the theme of, “As you can tell, I’ve been in my job for a while working a hybrid/remote schedule. I hear that since COVID, a lot of companies have started using surveillance technology, like keystroke logging and use of the webcam for remote workers. This is new to me–my workplaces have always been results-oriented and trusted me to prioritize and do my work. What’s your approach, as a manager, for monitoring remote employees?”

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      I really like the neutrality of this framing! It comes across more as curiosity about a slightly infamous but unfamiliar technology than as a clear dealbreaker, and that’s exactly the tone I’m hoping to strike. Thank you so much for this!

      Reply ↓
  19. Teyredto*

    A number of commenters have posted that the OP is only talking about things like key logs or mouse trackers. I don’t know that the OP has said or implied that? It seems like it’s an open question what level of surveillance they would be comfortable

    Reply ↓
    1. David*

      They made some comments in the earlier threads which clarified that they’re talking about a particularly invasive level of surveillance tech, things like video monitoring, screen recording, keyloggers, and similar. (Search for “LW*” in this page to find their comments)

      But yeah I suppose it wasn’t quite explicit in the letter.

      Reply ↓
    2. LW*

      Yeah, apologies for that! For me, the rise of these more invasive monitoring technologies during the COVID remote work shift was so notable, and the use of less invasive general monitoring technology before COVID so pervasive, that I honestly thought it was clear what I meant when I framed it in that context in the letter. It’s both interesting and reassuring to realize that most people don’t seem to default to thinking of the more invasive technologies but rather the general ability companies have to access your devices if they need or want to! Perhaps I’m being overly hopeful, but it indicates to me that this might not be as much of a concern as I was worried about. But yes, I do mean the more intense technologies like key logging, mouse trackers, screenshots, and video monitoring!

      Reply ↓
  20. Religious Nutter*

    LW, I share your concern even though I don’t come at it from an ADA perspective. I absolutely would not work in an environment that uses productivity monitoring software.

    It’s not even about it being creepy (it IS creepy though). To me it’s proof of bad management. People who think that tech and “AI” can solve their management issues are people who can’t manage. If you think that _screenshots_ and _mouse movement_ will give you an accurate picture of an employee’s value, that means _you don’t know what your employee is doing, you don’t know what you need them to do, and you don’t know what milestones/goals/deadlines you want them to meet_.

    All that monitoring tech can’t make up for a manager who _can’t tell a productive employee from a slacker_, and slackers will just figure out how best to game the tech.

    Like many of the off-the-wall management tactics that bubble up to Alison’s blog, monitoring software loses your best employees to competitors. The only people who stay are the ones who _can’t get a better job_.

    Reply ↓
  21. Analyst*

    In order for ADA to apply re: pulling the offer, the OP would have to disclose that they are asking for mental health or another ADA related reason though right? If they just ask about this, it’s not protected….

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      Correct, but asking about it would let me know whether or not I needed to get ADA in play! Which isn’t the situation I’d most like to be in, but it’s good to know my options.

      Reply ↓
  22. NursingaWound*

    I only found out my company used keystroke counters and anti-mouse jiggler software when I was called in to account for a specific day’s activities. Good thing I kept a diary, it was a day I was reviewing hard copy medical records for an independent medical evaluation. 10,000 pages of them. It took me all day to collate, weed out duplicates and assemble in a physician friendly way. Just so happened that none of this involved keying or mouse strokes. But the cat was out of the bag!

    Reply ↓
    2. Hroethvitnir*

      This just drives me up the wall. If you know you have people doing work like this, why on earth do you have this ridiculous software? -_-

      Reply ↓
  23. learnedthehardway*

    You could ask (quite legitimately) “How is performance measured within the company” and see what the answer is. Eg. if they say it’s based on metrics, you could ask how metrics are gathered.

    That might give you an idea of how much employee oversight there is.

    Another thing you can do would be to say that you left a past role due to micromanagement that included keylogging software installed on your work computer. You want to be with a company that trusts employees and rates performance based on work completed.

    Since dealing with that kind of surveillance is a hard no from you, I don’t see that you have anything to lose by saying that you won’t work under those conditions.

    Reply ↓
  24. Karl Havoc*

    Actually, this question is very timely – a story just broke today that one of these “bossware” surveillance programs had a major security vulnerability that left 21 million screenshots – full of sensitive company data – completely unsecured. (will link in reply comment) That could be a hook to raise the issue?

    Reply ↓
    1. LW*

      Whoa, I had no idea! Given the frequency of data breaches, security issues, and bad data management practices these days, I suppose I’m not surprised, but it does feel like an obvious potential outcome of these kinds of technologies now that it’s out there. I’ll definitely look into this (both for my own curiosity and because I think you’re right that there might be some potential to frame questions around this as questions around data security)!

      Reply ↓
  25. CubeFarmer*

    I don’t think there’s any way to raise this without someone questioning (either inwardly or out loud,) why you want to know. I don’t think the interview phase is the best time to disclose a mental-health issue.

    Reply ↓
  26. BCC*

    This is FAR from a certainty but one thing I have found directionally to be true is that companies headquartered in countries with strong employee protection laws (and data protection laws) that don’t allow some of the strong monitoring practices in their HQ country are less likely to implement these practices in other countries where it is possible. Partially because it is not top of mind to their leaders and partially because they can’t implement them in their major locations and so there is less incentive to implement it for only minor locations.

    Reply ↓
  27. Keyboard Cowboy*

    I haven’t seen anyone else suggest it. But depending on your role, you can probably obscure this question into general curiosity about the amount of enterprise management on the equipment you’ll be using.

    “How closely does IT manage the configuration of our work devices? I use , would I be able to install it or is there a configured policy?” -> Because these kinds of policy also come along with monitoring, and some companies simply don’t do it at all.

    “At a previous job, I found the IT restrictions on my computer slowed it to a crawl – I think they were taking screenshots all the time, but the result was that my computer was kind of a laggy mess. Is that something that’s typically been a problem here, or do you use some other way of managing corporate devices?” -> Maybe borderline since you’re complaining about your old job, but this comes a little closer to “do you take screenshots of my shit all the time”.

    Stuff like this. The surveillance comes along for the ride with other stuff that employers like to be able to do – make sure everyone is getting recent security updates, make sure nobody’s using potentially risky software, look at software logs if they’re having you use something developed in-house, etc. So if you can ask about the neighboring benefits, and slip in a mention to the surveillance stuff too, you might get an answer while coming off as genuinely curious and interested in their processes.

    Reply ↓
    1. Keyboard Cowboy*

      oh boo, I forgot about angle brackets disappearing in this comment format.

      The first example should say, “I use SomeProductivityTool, would I be able to install it or is there a configured policy preventing that?”

      Reply ↓

Leave a Comment

Before you comment: Please be kind, stay on-topic, and follow the site's commenting rules.
You can report an ad, tech, or typo issue here.

Subscribe to all comments on this post by RSS