Make Work Pay: workplace monitoring technologies
The TUC welcomes this consultation on workplace monitoring technologies (WMT). The government’s Plan to Make Work Pay sets out that “At a minimum [a Labour government will] ensure that proposals to introduce surveillance technologies would be subject to consultation and negotiation, with a view to agreement of trade unions or elected staff representatives where there is no trade union. Where there is a collective agreement relating to surveillance this will not override it.”
This commitment recognises a reality that is all too familiar to workers: that WMT are introduced by employers without the consultation and negotiation that is a prerequisite for fair and effective technology adoption. This undermines workers’ rights and their dignity at work. It also hinders the effective deployment of technology by undermining trust and not drawing on the expertise of workers. This is starkly illustrated by surveys of union members across sectors.
A 2020 survey of 7,500 members by the trade union Prospect found that more than 70 per cent of respondents have “no confidence” in how their employers engage them in decisions on technology 1 . A 2024 Communications Workers Union survey of members in the telecoms, finance and tech sectors found that 80 per cent of respondents “do not trust technological advances in workplaces” 2 . The Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW) surveyed members in 2026, with 85 per cent of respondents stating that employers had not consulted them on new technology or could not identify if a meaningful consultation had taken place. Over 75 per cent reported inadequate training on the new technology.
To address this, the TUC welcomes the principles the government has set out in the consultation for “responsible use of WMT which supports good industrial relations”. In particular, the principle of meaningful “worker engagement and voice" that the consultation identifies is central to the responsible and effective use of WMT. Worker engagement and voice is most effectively realised through independent trade unions engaged in consultation and negotiation with – as the government recognises – a view to reaching agreement. The current legal and policy framework – predominantly governed by UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – cannot effectively realise these principles or the positive outcomes sought by government and needed by workers. As it stands, data rights are often ignored, and the data protection regime relies on the unrealistic idea that individuals will have the ability and resources to pursue redress after the fact. Reform along the lines set out here would bring a collective dimension to data rights and processes of consultation and negotiation that can pre-empt abuse and misuse of WMT, enabling fair and effective use of technology.
Of those set out in the consultation paper, Option B supplemented by a statutory code of practice and guidance is the only viable route to achieving this. A statutory regime would establish a minimum floor which all employers must adhere to, preventing the undercutting of good practice by unscrupulous competitors. It would provide the practical and legally enforceable basis for workers and their representatives to effectively exercise ”worker voice” as the government seeks. Requiring employers to be transparent and proportionate in use of WMT would not inhibit the positive use of WMT, such as for health and safety. Rather, it would raise standards of technology development and workplace relations. Significant evidence from Gallup 3 and the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development 4 (CIPD) demonstrates that in general robust processes for worker voice lead to a range of better outcomes. This is the opportunity to bring WMT into this frame.
Though generative AI is not the focus of this consultation, the experience of too many workers is of unilateral imposition of technology. This is a driver of the high levels of concern now expressed by working people on the changes that task-automation technologies may bring. As part of a wider agenda on AI, the government must grasp this opportunity to empower workers to have voice, rights and a fair share of technology at work.
Finally, whereas most cases of WMT will be improved by consultation and negotiation, it is essential to recognise that some types of this technology are fundamentally exploitative by design. Dynamic pay setting is one such case. Opaque algorithmically changeable pay setting is an afront to basic standards of decent employment and should be prohibited under all circumstances. The TUC calls on the government to confront this degradation of working lives.
- 1 Prospect. Future of Work: Employers’ collection and use of worker data. February 2020
- 2 CWU. AI Awareness: Making AI Work for Workers.
- 3 Gallop. The Relationship Between Engagement at Work and Organizational Outcomes. 2024.
- 4 CIPD. UK industrial relations: a future with trade unions. October 2025
Stay Updated
Want to hear about our latest news and blogs?
Sign up now to get it straight to your inbox
