Workplace monitoring has become widespread and government scrutiny of how employers use it is set to increase. Around one in three UK organisations now monitor employees’ digital activity, up from one in five in 2023. Whilst workplace monitoring technology (WMT) helps employers improve efficiency, monitor performance and identify training needs, it also raises questions on privacy, transparency and the impact of automated decision-making on workers.
A new consultation seeks views on the use of WMT and whether further regulation or guidance is needed to support its responsible use. The consultation does not propose immediate legislative reform. Instead, it seeks views on how employers use monitoring technologies, whether the existing legal framework is adequate and whether the government should introduce a statutory code, a duty to consult workers or non-statutory guidance.
What is WMT?
The consultation defines WMT as digital tools that employers use to collect, track, analyse and make decisions on workers based on data collected. It covers tools that monitor productivity, communications, attendance or location, as well as systems which support or automate employment decisions.
Although WMT is particularly prevalent in platform-based and data-driven businesses, its use is spreading throughout other sectors. Employers may use it to improve their efficiency, monitor performance and/or identify misconduct, or establish training needs. However, poorly designed or governed monitoring can create risks relating to privacy, data protection, discrimination, accuracy and workplace trust.
Government consultation
At this stage, the government is not proposing legislative reform. It is seeking views on what the responsible use of WMT should look like in practice and whether it should intervene.
The consultation sets out eight principles which the government considers should underpin the responsible use of WMT. These principles reflect existing data protection and employment law. In summary, the principles are:
- use WMT for a clear and legitimate business purpose;
- tell workers what monitoring is happening, the data collected and how it will be used;
- engage and consult workers or their representatives on the introduction and use of WMT;
- ensure monitoring is fair and does not result in discriminatory outcomes;
- use the least intrusive monitoring necessary;
- maintain human involvement in decisions;
- consider the impact of monitoring on workers’ health and wellbeing; and
- regularly assess whether WMT is accurate and appropriate.
The consultation includes practical examples of how these principles may operate in practice. For instance, rather than relying on a privacy notice, an employer might use short summaries, FAQs or team briefings to explain what data it collects and what decisions that data informs. An employer introducing driver-facing cameras should identify whether its main aim is to improve road safety, reduce insurance costs or monitor performance and explain how footage will support that aim.
How does this fit with existing law?
The eight principles do not create new obligations. They largely restate duties employers already owe. Under UK data protection law, employers must have a lawful basis for processing personal data and ensure that monitoring is fair, transparent and proportionate. They should collect no more data than necessary and must keep it accurate and secure. Employers must carry out a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) where the proposed monitoring is likely to result in a high risk to individuals, such as profiling in relation to performance at work. Additional restrictions apply to the processing of special category data such as health or biometric information.
UK data protection law also regulates solely automated decision-making. Where an employer makes a decision without meaningful human involvement that has a legal or similarly significant effect on a worker, it must provide certain safeguards. These include giving the individual information about the decision and an opportunity to make representations, obtain human intervention and challenge the outcome.
Employment and equality law remain relevant. Employers may face liability where the design or use of an automated system results in unlawful discrimination. Any performance management, disciplinary action or dismissal informed by monitoring must still comply with the usual requirements of employment and equality law.
What may change?
The government seeks views on three options for intervention:
- A statutory code of practice: This would give practical guidance on using WMT, based on the existing legal framework. Employment tribunals could take the code into account in relevant proceedings, including in unfair dismissal and discrimination claims. Under the proposal, if the claim were successful and the tribunal finds the employer unreasonably failed to comply with the code, it would have discretion to increase compensation by up to 25%. Failure to follow the code would not create a standalone claim.
- A legislative duty to consult and negotiate with a view to reaching agreement with trade unions or elected representatives before introducing WMT: The aim of this option would be to take a proactive approach, requiring worker engagement at an early stage, with the intention of reducing disputes or challenges about the use of WMT. Enforcement would be through the employment tribunal system, but it would likely focus on procedural compliance rather than preventing the employer from adopting WMT.
- Non-statutory guidance: Whilst this would not create new legal obligations, it could provide employers with practical support and guidance on good practice. This would offer greater flexibility to respond to future technological developments but on its own may be less effective at causing behavioural change.
The government has not expressed a settled preference and may adopt one option, a combination of options or no intervention.
What should employers do now?
Though the consultation may not result in any immediate legislative change, it signals increasing expectations around transparency, proportionality, worker engagement and human oversight. Employers should expect greater scrutiny of both the reasons for monitoring and how monitoring data influences employment decisions.
For employers already using WMT, now is an appropriate time to review existing practices. There are several interim steps you may wish to consider:
- carry out a DPIA where monitoring is likely to result in a high risk to individuals and identify an appropriate lawful basis;
- define and document the purpose of each monitoring tool;
- explain the monitoring to workers through accessible summaries, FAQs or briefings, rather than relying solely on a privacy notice;
- build in meaningful human oversight of automated decisions and an effective route for workers to question or challenge them;
- test systems regularly for accuracy, proportionality and potentially discriminatory effects; and
- engage workers or their representatives before introducing or significantly changing WMT and document how you considered their feedback.
Consultation is not currently a general legal requirement whenever an employer introduces monitoring. Early engagement can nevertheless identify operational concerns, improve system design and reduce the risk of disputes.
The consultation applies to England, Wales and Scotland and runs until 30 September 2026.
