[nobody9999]

>I think we should also make it common practice to share grocery lists with your employer, as well as the date and time of sexual acts. This is even more justifiable than the status of the train that takes you to work.

>I mean, trains are late not often enough to make any significant difference. Whereas unhealthy diet, or say, sleepless nights of lovemaking, can dramatically affect a worker's productivity almost permanently.

You misunderstand me completely -- is that on purpose, are you only focused on your situation and assume no other situation could possible exist?

Or are you just dumb?

Contracts that an organization may have with their customers may require that personnel be onsite at particular times, with the caveat that penalties in the contract may be lessened or eliminated if the lapse was an event outside the contractor's control.

In such situations, it can be important (assuming you want to get paid) to be able to document such events.

[seabass-labrax]

Parent's comment was the sarcastic observation that if employers ought to be able to verify workers' commutes, they could justifiably also want to monitor other aspects of workers' lives outside of work that have a significant impact on productivity.

The argument is valid whilst being entirely dystopian. There is a level of trust, or at least tolerance, between employer and employee that must be accommodated in society; otherwise there is no choice but brutally invasive surveillance of all workers.

[nobody9999]

>Parent's comment was the sarcastic observation that if employers ought to be able to verify workers' commutes, they could justifiably also want to monitor other aspects of workers' lives outside of work that have a significant impact on productivity.

Was it? Where did you get that idea?

Based on their posting history (and I did check before replying just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding), that they were absolutely serious is most likely.

>The argument is valid whilst being entirely dystopian. There is a level of trust, or at least tolerance, between employer and employee that must be accommodated in society; otherwise there is no choice but brutally invasive surveillance of all workers.

Absolutely, and I never said anything different. In fact, the bit GP quoted and replied to was:

   >A fair point, but there are some circumstances where both employee and 
   employer may need to justify/document such circumstances -- but on the whole, 
   you're spot on.

Their response was orthogonal to my point. Which made me wonder why. And so I asked.

Keep an eye on my userid. If you don't like what I have to say, I strongly suggest you don't read my comments.

Have a great day!

Edit: Removed poorly supported assertions.

[seabass-labrax]

> Based on their posting history (and I did check before replying just to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding), that they were absolutely serious is most likely.

I, on the other hand, didn't check their posting history, and it looks like you might be right... Poe's Law strikes in reverse, perhaps!