"But I walked away from the research feeling shaken. The people we interviewed were excited about the app concept - not because it would decrease their workload or simplify anything, but because they could use it to work more. Creating something that entices people to spend extra time, off-the-clock, on work? That's exploitation. Unethical design or flexibility enhancer? Let me explain."
"That mobile app could encourage inequity and manipulation in multiple ways: Some folks start responding at all hours, which pressures the rest of the team to do the same. Failure to participate leads to resentment ("she's not working as hard as I am") and poor performance reviews - which disproportionately impact caretakers, parents (especially women), and people with disabilities. Hourly employees aren't paid for overtime spent using the app - which is corporate wage theft."
A concept test of a mobile app for financial and regulatory compliance users revealed enthusiasm for working on-the-go, driven by the ability to complete review tasks during personal time. This enthusiasm arose not from reduced workload but from enabling additional after-hours work. Mobile access can create pressure to respond at all hours, causing team resentment and disadvantaging caregivers, parents, and people with disabilities. Hourly workers risk unpaid overtime. Requiring personal devices exposes workers to remote wiping of personal data. Persistent connectivity undermines recovery from work and increases burnout. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified these dynamics as remote work proliferated.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]