UK workers report widespread workplace monitoring

Almost six in ten UK workers believe their employer monitors their activities, according to new research by workplace technology company Owl Labs, with the findings highlighting concerns about transparency and how organisations measure employee performance.

The company’s 2026 State of Hybrid Work report found that 59% of surveyed employees believed their organisation was monitoring them. Some 82% thought employers should be legally required to disclose their use of monitoring tools.

The findings are based on an online survey of 2,014 full-time UK employees conducted in July 2026 by Vitreous World. The wider research included 8,025 office workers across Britain, France, Germany and the United States.

The results describe employees’ reported knowledge and perceptions of monitoring rather than an independent examination of the systems installed by their employers.

Among the activities respondents believed were being recorded, login and logout times were most common, identified by 32%. Monitoring of meeting attendance was reported by 22%, followed by screen and mouse movements at 17% and keyboard activity at 15%.

The figures varied substantially between age groups. Some 71% of Generation Z respondents said their employer used monitoring software, compared with 38% of Generation X workers.

The research also questioned how well tracking activity reflects actual work performance. When managers were asked to identify the most important measures of productivity, 51% selected operational efficiency and 50% chose customer satisfaction.

Those measures differ from indicators such as login times or mouse activity, which show aspects of computer use but do not necessarily capture the value or quality of work completed.

The survey’s disclosure finding also needs to be considered alongside existing employment and data protection requirements. Under UK data protection law, employers already have obligations to ensure that monitoring involving personal information is lawful, fair and transparent.

Guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office requires organisations to explain the nature, extent and purpose of monitoring to workers, except in limited circumstances where covert monitoring can be justified. Employers must also identify an appropriate lawful basis for processing personal information.

The 82% figure therefore reflects employees’ views on disclosure rather than demonstrating that a general transparency obligation does not currently exist. Different monitoring practices may raise additional questions about necessity, proportionality and the information collected.

Beyond tracking software, Owl Labs found evidence of employees changing how they participate in meetings. Some 28% reported using what the company calls phantom meeting attendance, remaining on an invitation while relying on notes, recordings or AI-generated summaries to review the discussion afterwards.

The practice was reported by 33% of managers, compared with 15% of employees without management responsibilities. The survey also found that 42% of workers would consider using an AI avatar to attend meetings on their behalf, with interest reaching 50% among managers.

Those figures indicate interest in alternative ways of participating in meetings, rather than establishing that AI avatars have been widely deployed.

Meeting technology continued to create difficulties for employees. Some 73% reported losing time to technical problems during hybrid meetings, while 70% struggled to hear other participants and 69% experienced audio echo or distortion.

Employees said teams spent an average of six minutes getting a hybrid meeting started. Meanwhile, only 25% reported that their employer had installed or upgraded meeting-room video or audio equipment during 2026, compared with 35% in the preceding year.

The findings bring together two aspects of workforce management: the information organisations collect about employees and the practical conditions under which those employees work. While tracking systems can help employers understand activity, the research identifies continued problems with the technology employees use to collaborate and complete their work.

For employers reviewing monitoring arrangements, the results reinforce the importance of establishing what information is necessary, explaining how it will be used and distinguishing measures of activity from evidence of employee performance.