Is it legal to keep an activity log on some employees and not all of them?

I'm not sure I agree with Angie here, certainly the activity could be ethically sound and still interpreted as illegal, at least in the UK.

It is perfectly OK to monitor the time and attendance of any employee, without monitoring the time and attendance of all employees. If as an HR manager I recieve reports of particular individuals' tardiness, it is not necessary to investigate everyone in the business - just those specific individuals. It is also perfectly ethical to ask a receptionist to record when some people arrive and leave for this purpose.

In fact when working in Saudi Arabia, the whole business had an issue with time keeping but HR were the first put under the microscope for the problem - because it is hard to ask the rest of the business to comply with a directive if your own people don't follow it first. And we had an admin monitor HR time and attendance without monitoring anyone else's.

However on the legality side, this is not as clear cut particularly in a country like the UK with strong anti-discrimination legislation. If it turned out that there was a unifying theme or themes between those being monitored and those who are not (race, gender, religion, sexuality, age etc.) the action would be illegal, even if the specific concerns being addressed only applied to these groups. Because it would overwhelmingly appear that the concerns exist because of the minority grouping(s) and no other reason.

However to conduct this activity so indiscretely and so publicly is not good for morale and impinges on the trust relationship between the business and individuals - and could in the UK, form part of a constructive dismissal approach from those being surveilled.

I don't consider this an ethical issue but I do see a potential concern. It would all depend upon how the information is used and whether or not the individuals so affected were members of a protected class. If it is simply gathering of information then there is no concern. If the information is used and it adversely impacts a member of a protected class then obviously we can see the issue. I see Nick's point about potential morale issues but at this point you share nothing that would indicate this may be a problem.

Jesse, what is your role in the organization, in this issue and why does this cause you concern? Are you in a position to address the issue or are you in a position to be adversely impacted by improper use of the information? Does the Admin report to you or directly to the owner. What is your relationship to the owner? Of course the obvious point is "why gather information if you don't intend to use it." Consequently one would need to know why the Admin is gathering this information and what, if anything, she intends to do with it. Within the answers to all of those questions are suggestions as to what your next steps, if any, should be.

As to the constructive discharge point made by Nick. Here in the U.S. constructive discharge is not always an illegal or otherwise inappropriate action. An example would be the relocation of a company or the changing of an individuals shift. Neither, at face value, are inappropriate yet both can be construed as constructive discharge.As such specifics of the action would determine what bearing it would have on any claims for damages. Simply taking notes about employee attendance, with no follow-on action, would not rise to the level of constructive discharge here in the U.S. .

Hi Don,

Constructive dismissal in the UK, is basically where an employer causes enough hurt to the employee to "irrevocably sever the bond of trust" and the employee must walk out rather than resign (you can't be constructively dismissed if you resign). It's a hard one to win on at an industrial tribunal, and is usually brought about as part of a range of claims from what you would term as "protected classes".

Often an employee who is unhappy will try and engineer the situation, but they must have demonstrated their unhappiness in writing using the legal grievance procedure and have allowed the employer time to act on this grievance before resorting to this action. So it's a bit of sticky point to deal with.

I'm not sure if that's equivalent of the US version or not.

Hello Nik,

It is similar here. An example would be that a company moves it's offices further away from an employee's home thus extending the daily commute unreasonably. Of course unreasonable is not well defined. If an employee believes the distance is too great and resign they could state they were constructively discharged. About all that will do for them is assist them in prevailing on an unemployment insurance claim.

A more adverse example would be an employee subject to an abusive workplace environment. They resign and file suit. The burden is on the employee and as you describe for the UK it is equally challenging to prevail as a plaintiff in the US.

I am guessing that an "Industrial Tribunal" is some form of Administrative court or it it a part of the traditional judicial system?

Industrial tribunal is for all labour disputes in the UK, while it is possible for extreme discrimination cases to find their way to the criminal courts most of the time it ends up at tribunal, which decides on compensation etc.

Cheers for the response I learned something about US HR I've always wondered about.

Interesting. Thank you