With AI and advanced monitoring tools now capable of tracking everything from keystrokes to conversations, many organisations are reconsidering how they monitor employees.
However, as Tamsin Lawrence, Associate Director at Australian Business Lawyers & Advisors (ABLA), told HCAMag, employers may expose themselves to serious legal and reputational risks if they don’t approach surveillance carefully.
Executive assistants often play a role in managing communication, policies, and compliance across teams. Understanding the rules around surveillance isn’t just a legal technicality; it’s an integral part of supporting both leaders and employees in navigating modern workplace dynamics.
The legal landscape
Australia’s legal framework for surveillance is not straightforward. Lawrence explained that multiple layers of legislation apply. At the federal level, the Privacy Act outlines the guidelines for collecting, using, and storing personal information. At the state level, laws such as the Victorian Surveillance Devices Workplace Privacy Act add further obligations.
Adding another layer of complexity is the new criminal offence of “serious invasion of privacy,” which Lawrence said has broader implications for employers than the Privacy Act alone. This offence makes it even more critical for businesses to consider whether their surveillance practices cross the line carefully.
For EAs who support leaders in implementing workplace changes, these legal nuances are crucial. It may fall to you to coordinate policies, ensure employees are notified appropriately, or even draft communications that clearly and transparently explain surveillance practices.
Hybrid work raises new questions
One of the most challenging aspects is defining what constitutes a “workplace.” Is a conversation in a company car private, or is it a workplace exchange? If you’re working from home, is your kitchen table suddenly part of your employer’s office environment?
Lawrence noted that these blurred boundaries make it easier for employers to breach both federal and state laws unintentionally. For EAs, this means being vigilant in situations where surveillance might spill into their personal lives. For example, monitoring software that tracks activity during work-from-home arrangements could also capture information about family members, creating serious privacy risks.
The importance of transparency and purpose
According to Lawrence, the foundation of lawful and ethical surveillance is having a “clear and legitimate purpose” for collecting data. Monitoring employees can be justified in certain circumstances, such as ensuring safety, preventing fraud, or managing resources. However, employers must be able to explain precisely why they are collecting information and how it will be utilised.
Problems often arise when surveillance is introduced without sufficient clarity. Broad, untargeted monitoring, such as tracking every employee’s online activity just in case, can create legal headaches and damage trust.
For EAs, who often serve as the bridge between leadership and staff, this highlights the importance of clear communication. Helping leaders craft messages that outline why monitoring is necessary, what data is being collected, and how it will be safeguarded can significantly impact employee acceptance.
Consultation and employee well-being
Beyond the legal obligations, Lawrence pointed out that employers also need to think about consultation. Employees should be engaged in discussions about new surveillance practices, rather than having them imposed without notice. This is especially important given the potential psychosocial impact of monitoring. Constant surveillance can affect well-being, leading to stress, anxiety, or reduced morale.
Data security and storage risks
Even when surveillance is justified, storing the collected data poses its own challenges. High-profile data breaches in Australia have demonstrated the devastating consequences of mishandling sensitive information. Lawrence emphasised the need for employers to consider not just why they are collecting information, but where and how it is stored, and for how long.
If data is kept beyond its legitimate purpose, for example, to use later in performance management without disclosure, employers risk breaching both legal and ethical obligations.
Practical takeaways
As workplace surveillance becomes more common, EAs can be instrumental in handling it responsible. Some practical steps include:
- Ask about purpose: Whenever surveillance measures are introduced, confirm the legitimate purpose behind them.
- Ensure transparency: Support leadership in communicating clearly with staff about what data is collected and why.
- Watch for wellbeing risks: Keep an eye on employee sentiment and raise concerns if monitoring seems excessive or stressful.
- Support compliance: Help leaders stay across federal and state laws by coordinating legal reviews or policy updates.
- Think data security: Encourage careful consideration of where surveillance data is stored and who has access.
Workplace surveillance is no longer just about cameras in the office. In the hybrid era, it extends into employees’ homes, devices, and daily routines. For executive assistants, understanding the legal, ethical, and human dimensions of monitoring is vital.
