First, as noted above, most U.S. workers report some form of electronic monitoring on the job, with more than two-thirds (68 percent) of U.S. workers reporting at least one form of electronic monitoring. Overall rates of electronic worker surveillance cut across occupational and industry lines, and were just as common among blue collar workers as among white collar workers—though the specific types of surveillance varied by the kind of work. One of the strongest predictors of the adoption of electronic surveillance was employer size: workers in larger organizations were substantially more likely to report all forms of surveillance than were workers in small organizations.

Second, I found very strong relationships between certain forms of electronic monitoring and worker health and safety. In particular, I found that workers who reported more intensive electronic productivity monitoring at their jobs were substantially more likely to report anxiety at work; needing to work at unsafe speeds; and experiencing work-related injuries in the past year, especially serious injuries. These differences persist even after accounting for a range of workers’ own demographic characteristics, as well as characteristics of their jobs and workplaces. The association between electronic monitoring and negative health and safety outcomes for workers across all sectors of the economy—not just those receiving attention in the past, such as warehousing—strongly calls for policy attention and action.