London Tube Cleaners Don't Want Fingerprint Clock-in 351
Bismillah writes "Biometrics is hot stuff, not just for Apple but cleaning companies like the UK division of Denmark's IIS which tidies the London Underground railway network. However, the cleaners aren't happy about having to clock in and out with biometric fingerprint sensors, and are taking industrial action to stop the practice."
Fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
The only "civil liberty" it attacks is the ability to fraudulently sign in for someone else. This is how unions get a bad name. Bio-metrics are used for time card validation on many places and it is neither "draconian" nor "an attack on civil liberties".
The article then goes on to talk about biometric authentication on mobile devices which has nothing to do with biometric time card sign ins. This is another sensationalistic piece which brings together unrelated information in an attempt to make a big splash.
Re:Fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a well oiled system in place for trading clock ins. If they implement this new technology it will throw a wrench in the works.
-IANALTC
Re:BFD (Score:5, Insightful)
Just be happy you have a job.
This is exactly what the slavemasters want you to think.
Re:Fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue is about having the fingerprint data. Business promise things to worker all the time, but their promises are so often just lies (and recently, at least in the US, told to lie by no such agency).
Thief (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't be wimps. Get the model number of the equipment, research how it works, and circumvent. The hard part is keeping the circumvention from management, unless they are participants. I enjoy modern tech. Old school tech like video cameras are tricky. It always raises suspicion when employees are clocking in wearing gorilla masks. One position I had used special encrypted key chain tokens to open the doors, which also clocked you in. Nice, but after a few weeks of trials I found the encryption was not so tough. I could copy other IDs as they walked by in the pub. It was as difficult as those smart cards they use instead of quarters at the laundry. I had $2,000 on my laundry card to make sure it didn't run out.
Just because it's easy to steal doesn't mean it's okay.
On the fence. (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, They have really failed to outline how their civil liberties are being attacked. To what extent can someones thumbprint be abused and how will this affect workers and their rights. None of that was even attempted to be explained.
To anyone saying that the workers just want to fraudulently sign in for someone else and abuse the system needs to try again and come up with a real argument. The assumption that workers just want to screw over employers is elitist and is a part of the same poor logic of "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about." It completely side steps the real issues and disguises the technology as only hurting the bad people. While I don't deny that fraud probably happens, there is no way that fraud is the sole reason for rejection of biometrics. Give real reasons for it, not made up reasons for why the are against it.
Re:Fraud (Score:4, Insightful)
The only "civil liberty" it attacks is the ability to fraudulently sign in for someone else.
Well, that... and it lets them share the prints with law enforcement, cross check the fingerprints with cases and what not, and subject them to all kinds of harrassment.
I object to being fingerprinted for any reason, short of with a judge issued warrant. And I object to routine finger printing of individuals who are released without being charged, nevermind individuals who are acquitted.
I'm certainly not going to hand over my fingerprints just to prove I'm doing a menial job I'm being paid to do. If my employer is concerned the job isn't being done properly, inspect the work being performed -- biometrics showing I clocked in on time don't mean a damned thing.
Re:BFD (Score:5, Insightful)
How about instead "Just be thankful you have workers"?
What's more important: human beings or the profit of corporations?
I think the best way to promote a positive evolution of morality, for the sake of mankind, is to deal with each individual according to their answer to that question... As a form of preliminary screening.
Re:"taking industrial action" (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not necessarily. They might adopt a strict work-to-rule regime where workers do absolutely nothing that is not by-the-book, no staying 10 minutes over time to finish a job, no doing a job without that is not covered explicitly in their work agreements, taking every minute of meal breaks, reporting every little maintenance task they find in glorious detail, etc.
Re:On the fence. (Score:5, Insightful)
What is pretty certain is that somebody worked and that somebody is attached to a number that should get paid.
There is a simple scam that gets around paper systems. You tell you mate that you are going to be late so he leaves a blank line on the sign in sheet above his name. When you get there you sign in on the blank line and no one will be the wiser.
The other issue with paper systems is that they have to be transcribed by a person into the payroll system. That introduces mistakes and higher costs.
Re:BFD (Score:5, Insightful)
well the reason they don't want the scanners is that then they can't as easily sell their job when they move on - or have their cousin cover for them on a sick day.
unfortunately england is chock full of people who would take the job. for this same reason there's factories in china and latin america where the attendance of the workers is 99.9%(that is: no sickdays taken ever). sure, you can't be sure that it's always the same guy but you can be sure the family arranges someone to cover because that one worker feeds 10 people.
Re:Peter Principle (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fraud (Score:4, Insightful)
As in the significant features are hashed. With you know, a hashing function. Non-reversible.
Re:BFD (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:On the fence. (Score:5, Insightful)
i know its dependant on the card system but last time I had one the alternative to swiping the card was to punch in the last four digits. This I did on a regular basis because like you said it takes longer to swipe.
rfid cards are used a lot for door access which has the issue that if you forgot that card then you might not be able to open the door.
There are positives to using a finger print scanner, you can't forget the card, you can log fairly accurately who was where at a particular time. However logging out is a bit more hit and miss. Too be fair the London Underground has been a terrorist target before now and will be again,although the last time it was suicide bombers among the passengers. It might make sense to use this system for all the employees of the London underground but to single out the cleaners makes no sense if they are the only group using it there is no security advantage.
The primary objection to use of fingerprints instead of any of the alternatives is fundamentally an issue of trust.
The main group of people who have fingerprints taken are criminals, are the cleaners criminals?
As a subset of workers being targeted for this particular type of identification it seems to send the message that they are particularly untrustworthy, how much of a slap in the face is that. There is always a supervisor/ team leader in charge of a particular crew who knows the people working for him and who is on shift and who isn't in any job. Isn't that enough?
Even if the use of finger print scanners was universal, it wouldn't stop a terrorist, if they need a finger to gain access then they may as well take a finger its just one more casualty. The underground is not secure and cannot be secure and thousands of graffiti tagged trains illustrate that daily.
It is demoralising for the workforce and the system advantages soon start to fall apart when there is a need for agency workers to fill in for absent employees, it is a lot easier to issue a swipe card than to register a temporary worker on a fingerprint based system.
Re:BFD (Score:3, Insightful)
It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt.. (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a bunch of problems with "clocking in as someone else"
1) If there's a disaster and they need to know "who are we searching for", time card records are a good source
2) There are wage and hour laws designed to prevent employer abuse of employees (e.g. overtime rules). Allowing one person to clock in as another opens the door to abuse: (you take my shift or I'll report that you were doing drugs in the restroom on break) (I don't care if you've got to get home, and I'm not paying overtime, clock in as Joe Blow for second shift)
3) Insurance rates and payments (worker's comp, unemployment) are set by number of hours worked/dollars paid.
4) Liability issues with "were you at work when you received this injury"
5) Safety issues with working hours (OK, now that you've driven that bus as John Doe for 8 hours and you've hit your max duty hour limit, you can sign is a Richard Roe and do another shift)
Yes, many employers have inflexible policies on work shifts, either out of inertia or bad management. But perturbing the record keeping to work around it is a bad solution. Fix the underlying problem, don't band aid it.
Re:BFD (Score:2, Insightful)
That's not going to happen until we can pay people for 3 hours of work if they only get the job half done in a day. I would personally love to see accurate, merit based pay, but how do you manage to do that fairly? You can't really, would be nice if we could though.
Re:BFD (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, we as society could stop demeaning people for doing good work and making the world a better place. Do you want to be able to take a subway without the place reeking of shit and puke? Then be thankful for the people cleaning it up; give them respect, good working conditions, and a living wage. Anyone who is creating value for society deserves that much, whether they're designing the next iPhone or washing the piss smell of a public lavatory. And if you don't give them any of that, don't be surprised if they don't deliver very much value to you.
If the card is exactly the same, then why go through the expense of the fancy new equipment?
If the fingerprint system really is cheaper / more robust / maintainable / whatever, then it may make sense to upgrade. If, as I suspect, it is is more expensive, and they're doing it not to reduce costs and increase efficiency of processing but to have more control over people. Either that's not necessary, in which case it's demeaning, or it is necessary, in which case (it seems to me) they're doing something else really wrong.
Re:BFD (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting. At what level of career achievement does someone stop being a subhuman deserving of debasement, in your eyes?