Lidl : Surveillance Case Study Essay

Better Essays
As long as there has been employment, employees have been monitored (Nebeker & Tatum, 1993). However as the progress of technology becomes more rapid and equipment for monitoring is available to all, surveillance in the workplace has become a more alarming issue and the boundaries of what is necessary and what is an invasion of privacy are very vague. A case study presented for scrutiny is that of the ‘German supermarket chain Lidl accused of snooping on staff’.
Many employers appoint surveillance within the workplace for a variety of reasons such as safety, prevention of theft or misuse and performance checks. The issues identified within this article are that of whether the monitoring that was carried out was necessary or whether
…show more content…
As this is one of the things that is monitored via the cameras and then such action being taken as (in the extreme) a ‘worker being forbidden to go to the toilet during working hours’ creates a sense of restriction for the employees. The employees are faced with a very controlled environment leading to them being stripped of control and their actions being dictated and monitored by managerial staff. The words of a former employee ‘when one needs the money, one lets many things pass’ (appendix 1.1) show she views the disturbances caused to her as harm and therefore Lidl could be a potential source of stress. The culture of discouraging creativity and initiative (see appendix 1.1) that Lidl creates results as a further lack of control for the employee and no sense of belonging.
As can be seen from paragraph one in appendix 1 Lidl didn’t just monitor the employees but held personal information about their love lives and finances. Also women having to wear a headband if on their period to be allowed to go to the toilet can increase stress as they may not want private information such as this revealed to the public.
The way each individual copes with this will be different and according to the Cooper-Cummings framework (cited in Cartwright and Cooper 1997) if there is failure to cope there is an occurrence of continued stress.
Referring back to figure 1, Cartwright and Cooper (1997) argue that non-work factors are one of the sources of stress. The supporting
Get Access