Technology that tracks your location at work and the time you鈥檙e spending in the bathroom. A program that takes random screenshots of your laptop screen. A monitoring system that detects your mood during your shift.

These are just some ways employee surveillance technology 鈥� now turbocharged, thanks to the explosive growth of artificial intelligence 鈥� is being deployed.

Canada鈥檚 laws aren鈥檛 keeping up, experts warn.

鈥淎ny working device that your employer puts in your hand, you can assume it has some way of monitoring your work and productivity,鈥� said Valerio De Stefano, Canada research chair in innovation law and society at York University.

鈥淓lectronic monitoring is a reality for most workers.鈥�

Artificial intelligence could also be determining whether someone gets, or keeps, a job in the first place.

Automated hiring is already 鈥渆xtremely widespread,鈥� with nearly all Fortune 500 companies in the United States using AI to hire new workers, De Stefano said.

Unlike traditional monitoring, he added, AI is making 鈥渁utonomous decisions about hiring, retention and discipline鈥� or providing recommendations to the employer about such decisions.

Employee surveillance can look like a warehouse worker with a mini-computer on their arm that鈥檚 tracking every movement they make, said Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e building a pallet, but that particular mini-computer is tracking every single step, every flick of the wrist, so to speak,鈥� Bruske said.

鈥淭hey know exactly how many boxes are being placed on that pallet, how much time it鈥檚 taking, how many extra steps that worker might have taken.鈥�

There is little data documenting how widespread AI-powered worker surveillance might be in Canada. Unless employers are up front about their practices, 鈥渨e don鈥檛 necessarily know,鈥� Bruske said.

In a 2022 study by the Future Skills Centre, the pollster Abacus Data surveyed 1,500 employees and 500 supervisors who work remotely.

Seventy per cent reported that some or all aspects of their work were being digitally monitored.

About one-third of employees said they experienced at least one instance of location tracking, webcam or video recording, keystroke monitoring, screen grabs or employer use of biometric information.

鈥淭here is a patchwork of laws governing workplace privacy which currently provides considerable leeway for employers to monitor employees,鈥� the report noted.

Electronic monitoring in the workplace has been around for years. But the technology has become more intimate, taking on tasks like listening to casual conversations between workers.

It鈥檚 also become easier for companies to use and more customized to their specific needs 鈥� and more normalized, said McGill University associate professor Renee Sieber.

De Stefano said artificial intelligence has made electronic monitoring more invasive, since 鈥渋t is able to process much more data and is more affordable.鈥�

鈥淓mployer monitoring has skyrocketed鈥� since AI has been around, he added.

Those in the industry, however, insist there鈥檚 also a positive side.

Toronto-based FutureFit AI makes an AI-powered career assistant, which CEO Hamoon Ekhtiari said can help individuals navigate workplaces that are being rapidly changed by the technology.

AI can look for jobs, give career guidance, look for training programs or generate a plan for next steps. In the hiring process, it can give applicants rapid feedback about gaps in their applications, Ekhtiari said.

As artificial intelligence permeates Canadian workplaces, legislators are making efforts to bring in new rules.

The federal government has proposed Bill C-27, which would set out obligations for 鈥渉igh-impact鈥� AI systems.

That includes those dealing in 鈥渄eterminations in respect of employment, including recruitment, referral, hiring, remuneration, promotion, training, apprenticeship, transfer or termination,鈥� said Innovation Minister Fran莽ois-Philippe Champagne.

Champagne has flagged concerns AI systems could perpetuate bias and discrimination in hiring, including in who sees job ads and how applicants are ranked.

But critics have taken issue with the bill not explicitly including worker protections. It also won鈥檛 come into effect immediately, only after regulations implementing the bill are developed.

In 2022, Ontario began requiring employers with 25 or more employees to have a written policy describing electronic monitoring and stating for what purposes it can use that information.

Neither the proposed legislation nor Ontario law 鈥渁fford enough protection to workers,鈥� De Stefano said.

Activities like reading employee emails and time tracking are allowed, as long as the employer has a policy and informs workers about what鈥檚 happening, he added.

鈥淚t鈥檚 good to know, but if I don鈥檛 have recourse against the use of these systems, some of which can be extremely problematic, well, the protection is actually not particularly meaningful.鈥�

Ontario has also proposed requiring employers to disclose AI use in hiring. If passed, it would make the province the first Canadian jurisdiction to implement such a law.

Provincial and federal privacy laws should offer some protections, in theory. But Canada鈥檚 privacy commissioners have warned that existing privacy legislation is woefully inadequate.

They said in October 鈥渢he recent proliferation of employee monitoring software鈥� has 鈥渞evealed that laws protecting workplace privacy are either out of date or absent altogether.鈥�

Watchdogs in other countries have been cracking down. In January, France hit Amazon with a $35-million fine for monitoring workers with an 鈥渆xcessively intrusive system.鈥�

The issue has also been on the radar for unions. The Canadian Labour Congress isn鈥檛 satisfied with Bill C-27, and employees and their unions have not been adequately consulted, Bruske said.

De Stefano said the government should 鈥渟top making the adoption of these systems the unilateral choice of employers鈥� and instead give workers a chance to be fully informed and express their concerns.

Governments should be aiming for something that distinguishes between monitoring performance and surveillance, putting bathroom-break timing in the latter category, Sieber added.

A case could be made to ban some technologies outright, such as 鈥渆motional AI鈥� tools that detect whether a worker in front of a computer screen or on an assembly line is happy, she said.

Emily Niles, a senior researcher with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, said AI systems run on information like time logs, the number of tasks completed during a shift, email content, meeting notes and cellphone use.

鈥淎I doesn鈥檛 exist without data, and it鈥檚 actually our data that it is running on,鈥� Niles said.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 a significant point of intervention for the union, to assert workers鈥� voices and control over these technologies.鈥�

Anja Karadeglija, The Canadian Press