Honestly, I don't think this law is broad enough. Implanting a microchip is a surgery. A very minor one, of course, but it's still invading the body. It should not be legal to have surgeries of...
Honestly, I don't think this law is broad enough.
Implanting a microchip is a surgery. A very minor one, of course, but it's still invading the body. It should not be legal to have surgeries of any kind as a prerequisite for employment.
Considering the number of vaccinations I've had to undergo for healthcare IT work (as in, "we won't let you in the building if you're not up-to-date on your shots, with certificates"), I'm not...
Considering the number of vaccinations I've had to undergo for healthcare IT work (as in, "we won't let you in the building if you're not up-to-date on your shots, with certificates"), I'm not sure there's adequate legal protection to reject a "minor" surgical invasion.
Somewhat similar claims could be made that RFID tracking is done to protect employees and clients, e.g. in childcare or other custodial settings. But there's no legitimate need to use anything other than a badge or token system, at least outside the realm of national security-scale threats.
There’s probably a valid medical justification to prevent a worker from accessing health care facilities without being properly vaccinated. A tracking device fulfill a different requirement. It...
There’s probably a valid medical justification to prevent a worker from accessing health care facilities without being properly vaccinated. A tracking device fulfill a different requirement. It seems reasonable to pose distinct objections for each one of them.
I'm not certain which new, improved virtual dystopia I woke up in this morning, but apparently employers mandating microchipping is enough of a thing that multiple U.S. states are introducing...
I'm not certain which new, improved virtual dystopia I woke up in this morning, but apparently employers mandating microchipping is enough of a thing that multiple U.S. states are introducing bills to make it "voluntary".
The only reason for employers to use implantable chips is a level of authoritarian distrust that emphasizes how abusive the employer/employee relationship has become. I've had to install biometric time-tracking systems; employers claim that people routinely clock-in for each other if only cards or badges are used. Considering all the other avenues for "time theft", it was hard to see how taking employees' fingerprints would foster the kind of loyalty that makes people hesitate to slack or steal. Likewise, the kind of ubiquitous micromanagement that tracks badges or chips for extraction of maximum labor will ultimately cause employee turnover at a rate that's far more costly to business.
Given the choice between having a job where your rewards will almost certainly be based on how trackable you are (voluntary or not), and no job at all, it's hard to see potential employees having leverage to refuse implants. It's already well-established that U.S. employers have a very low burden of proof for any level of workplace surveillance they deem necessary for operations.
The law isn't settled in many areas to do with personal RFID data use, and there's no practical way* to eliminate passive scanning of the RFID beacon's data outside of work.
I offer this as a cautionary tale from the U.S.
GDPR-affected EU members may be a little better, but many other nations almost certainly have no barriers to the most intrusive surveillance systems, at work or otherwise.
[Footnote: I have some skin in this game, as I'm engaging with a business that provides RFID systems for tracking equipment and personnel badges in healthcare. Hospital staff are not thrilled to be tracked, even if it means they're better-compensated because their patient care time is recorded more accurately.]
*I call dibs on the patent for the Michael Jackson-esque glittery Faraday glove.
This here demonstrates that it is possible to use these things for good...page closest available first for crisis, etc. But the sad state of the employee/employer relationship in the US means it...
even if it means they're better-compensated because their patient care time is recorded more accurately
This here demonstrates that it is possible to use these things for good...page closest available first for crisis, etc.
But the sad state of the employee/employer relationship in the US means it will mostly be used to do stuff like fire people who sit in the bathroom for more than 2 minutes. Or slowly drift a reward-based system (bonus for better patient care) into a terrible one (no more than 5 min per patient to meet metrics).
Yes, your speculation about the problems is accurate, from my experience. It's cool to know exactly where the nearest restocked crash cart or cardiologist is, and ensure that everything is...
Yes, your speculation about the problems is accurate, from my experience.
It's cool to know exactly where the nearest restocked crash cart or cardiologist is, and ensure that everything is efficiently utilized. But in the U.S. profit-driven health system, it's often a means of reducing slack to the point that there's no spare capacity for shocks - with COVID-19 shortages as a case in point.
I've also seen the results of metricization and management by KPI's that reinforce labor/management dysfunction rather than correcting it. Even if employee tracking could improve safety, satisfaction, and efficiency, it's way too easy to create good numbers in charts and bad outcomes in reality.
I had no idea this was a thing, and I find it quite worrying. I found some additional articles that might be of interest: Endgadget from Nov. 2018 More companies are chipping their workers like...
If you really want to dig into the nitty-gritty details, you can spec out your own personal passive RFID or NFC implant here: https://dangerousthings.com/chip-implants-101/ I don't think I'd want...
I don't think I'd want a semi-permanent authentication implant that's potentially difficult to update/upgrade/protect. But there are clearly some bleeding-edge (SWIDT) l33t haxx0rz who just have to play with all the things.
User testing doesn't suggest that implants are really the best way to deal with the thorny problems of authentication, even ignoring the potential abuses.
That's not to say implants can't or won't be abused. As early as 2006, U.S. right-wing legislators were speculating about the most heinous possible ways to use implanted trackers - on migrants, on bailed suspects before trial...
I'll note that there's one growing area of legitimate use which came to my attention in researching the latest - active RFID for medical telemetry, and passive tracking of assistive device or tissue implants.
Whether this is voluntary or not, it's creepy. It's like employers have been watching dystopian sci-fi films and asking "how soon can we have all this?" I'm old enough to remember when we were...
Whether this is voluntary or not, it's creepy. It's like employers have been watching dystopian sci-fi films and asking "how soon can we have all this?"
I'm old enough to remember when we were promised that more technology in the workplace would free us from having to work so hard. That turned out to be a lie. Instead, our employers got greedy and demanded ever increasing profits and ever decreasing costs. Modern workers are slaves, given just enough wages to exist and entertain themselves so they can continue to make profits for the rich, until they are too old to be useful and die in debt. We have created an appalling existence for ourselves.
Honestly, I don't think this law is broad enough.
Implanting a microchip is a surgery. A very minor one, of course, but it's still invading the body. It should not be legal to have surgeries of any kind as a prerequisite for employment.
Considering the number of vaccinations I've had to undergo for healthcare IT work (as in, "we won't let you in the building if you're not up-to-date on your shots, with certificates"), I'm not sure there's adequate legal protection to reject a "minor" surgical invasion.
Somewhat similar claims could be made that RFID tracking is done to protect employees and clients, e.g. in childcare or other custodial settings. But there's no legitimate need to use anything other than a badge or token system, at least outside the realm of national security-scale threats.
There’s probably a valid medical justification to prevent a worker from accessing health care facilities without being properly vaccinated. A tracking device fulfill a different requirement. It seems reasonable to pose distinct objections for each one of them.
I'm not certain which new, improved virtual dystopia I woke up in this morning, but apparently employers mandating microchipping is enough of a thing that multiple U.S. states are introducing bills to make it "voluntary".
The only reason for employers to use implantable chips is a level of authoritarian distrust that emphasizes how abusive the employer/employee relationship has become. I've had to install biometric time-tracking systems; employers claim that people routinely clock-in for each other if only cards or badges are used. Considering all the other avenues for "time theft", it was hard to see how taking employees' fingerprints would foster the kind of loyalty that makes people hesitate to slack or steal. Likewise, the kind of ubiquitous micromanagement that tracks badges or chips for extraction of maximum labor will ultimately cause employee turnover at a rate that's far more costly to business.
Given the choice between having a job where your rewards will almost certainly be based on how trackable you are (voluntary or not), and no job at all, it's hard to see potential employees having leverage to refuse implants. It's already well-established that U.S. employers have a very low burden of proof for any level of workplace surveillance they deem necessary for operations.
The law isn't settled in many areas to do with personal RFID data use, and there's no practical way* to eliminate passive scanning of the RFID beacon's data outside of work.
I offer this as a cautionary tale from the U.S.
GDPR-affected EU members may be a little better, but many other nations almost certainly have no barriers to the most intrusive surveillance systems, at work or otherwise.
[Footnote: I have some skin in this game, as I'm engaging with a business that provides RFID systems for tracking equipment and personnel badges in healthcare. Hospital staff are not thrilled to be tracked, even if it means they're better-compensated because their patient care time is recorded more accurately.]
*I call dibs on the patent for the Michael Jackson-esque glittery Faraday glove.
This here demonstrates that it is possible to use these things for good...page closest available first for crisis, etc.
But the sad state of the employee/employer relationship in the US means it will mostly be used to do stuff like fire people who sit in the bathroom for more than 2 minutes. Or slowly drift a reward-based system (bonus for better patient care) into a terrible one (no more than 5 min per patient to meet metrics).
Yes, your speculation about the problems is accurate, from my experience.
It's cool to know exactly where the nearest restocked crash cart or cardiologist is, and ensure that everything is efficiently utilized. But in the U.S. profit-driven health system, it's often a means of reducing slack to the point that there's no spare capacity for shocks - with COVID-19 shortages as a case in point.
I've also seen the results of metricization and management by KPI's that reinforce labor/management dysfunction rather than correcting it. Even if employee tracking could improve safety, satisfaction, and efficiency, it's way too easy to create good numbers in charts and bad outcomes in reality.
I had no idea this was a thing, and I find it quite worrying. I found some additional articles that might be of interest:
Endgadget from Nov. 2018 More companies are chipping their workers like pets
The Guardian Nov. 2019 The rise of microchipping: are we ready for technology to get under the skin?
If you really want to dig into the nitty-gritty details, you can spec out your own personal passive RFID or NFC implant here: https://dangerousthings.com/chip-implants-101/
I don't think I'd want a semi-permanent authentication implant that's potentially difficult to update/upgrade/protect. But there are clearly some bleeding-edge (SWIDT) l33t haxx0rz who just have to play with all the things.
User testing doesn't suggest that implants are really the best way to deal with the thorny problems of authentication, even ignoring the potential abuses.
That's not to say implants can't or won't be abused. As early as 2006, U.S. right-wing legislators were speculating about the most heinous possible ways to use implanted trackers - on migrants, on bailed suspects before trial...
I'll note that there's one growing area of legitimate use which came to my attention in researching the latest - active RFID for medical telemetry, and passive tracking of assistive device or tissue implants.
I found this headline deeply confusing, here's one that's more clear: "Bill makes it so implanted microchips cannot be required for employment."
I spent a lot of time thinking this had something to do with Bill Gates :P
Whether this is voluntary or not, it's creepy. It's like employers have been watching dystopian sci-fi films and asking "how soon can we have all this?"
I'm old enough to remember when we were promised that more technology in the workplace would free us from having to work so hard. That turned out to be a lie. Instead, our employers got greedy and demanded ever increasing profits and ever decreasing costs. Modern workers are slaves, given just enough wages to exist and entertain themselves so they can continue to make profits for the rich, until they are too old to be useful and die in debt. We have created an appalling existence for ourselves.