U.S. survey: 1 in 6 workers would quit over workplace surveillance as monitoring increases

What if your employer could see everything you do—from the websites you visit to how often you step away from your desk? For many U.S. employees, this is no longer a hypothetical scenario. With over 73% of companies now using online monitoring tools and more than half tracking physical spaces, workplace surveillance is becoming the norm.

ExpressVPN’s latest survey of 1,500 U.S.-based employers and 1,500 employees highlights how these practices are affecting employees and reshaping the workplace. While employers claim that surveillance boosts productivity, employees see a different picture. Many feel monitored without their knowledge, pressured to work faster, and even reluctant to take breaks. A growing number are pushing back—using creative tactics to appear “busy” or simply walking away from jobs where privacy no longer exists.

From the rise of hybrid work to the adoption of AI and biometric monitoring, surveillance tools are evolving rapidly. But these technologies are also driving tensions, raising questions about fairness, trust, and mental health in the modern workplace.

Monitoring in action: How U.S. employers track their workforce

Workplace monitoring has moved far beyond simple timesheets and manager check-ins. As companies adapt to hybrid and remote work, the tools they use to keep tabs on employees have become more sophisticated—and more invasive. Employers now track websites, monitor screens in real-time, and collect biometric data, leaving many workers feeling like every move they make is under a microscope.

Employers turn to advanced tools to keep workers in check

From digital monitoring to physical surveillance, companies are ramping up efforts to oversee their employees. 74% of U.S. employers now use online tracking tools to monitor work activities, including real-time screen tracking (59%) and web browsing logs (62%). These tools not only track clock-in times, but they reveal exactly where employees are spending their time online, painting a detailed picture of productivity—or perceived lack of it.

Surveillance doesn’t stop in the digital space. Inside physical offices, 75% of employers use monitoring methods like video surveillance (69%) and biometric access controls (58.3%). Whether it’s scanning fingerprints or analyzing facial recognition data, these tools give employers even more control over where employees go and what they do.

But it’s not just traditional monitoring at play. 61% of companies are now using AI-powered analytics to measure productivity, while 67% collect biometric data to monitor employee behavior and attendance.

The impact on employees: Most feel in the dark about surveillance

For many employees, workplace surveillance feels deeply invasive, eroding trust between workers and their employers. Awareness gaps only make things worse. While 3 in 4 companies use online monitoring tools, biometric surveillance is also widespread. Yet only 22% of employees report knowing they’re being monitored online.

Even more concerning, 44% of employees say they had no idea whether their employer uses biometric surveillance methods like facial recognition or fingerprint scans. This highlights a significant awareness gap, with many employees unsure of whether their biometric data is being collected or how it’s being used.

This lack of transparency leaves employees uneasy about how their personal data is being handled. 56% of workers worry about privacy violations and the potential misuse of sensitive information. For the 25% of employees subjected to both online and physical monitoring, the constant oversight compounds these concerns, making many feel as though every move they make is being scrutinized.

Surveillance divides the hybrid workplace

Hybrid work has redefined how businesses operate, blending flexibility with oversight. But for many U.S. employees, this shift has brought growing concerns about workplace surveillance. Employers now lean heavily on digital and physical monitoring tools to manage dispersed teams, but these efforts often create more tension than trust.

Employers double down on control as hybrid work dominates

The shift to hybrid work has forced many employers to rethink how they manage their teams. According to our survey, over 80% of companies now operate under a hybrid model. However, for employers, this flexibility comes at a cost. Many report feeling uneasy about their ability to oversee operations, with fully remote work dropping to just 19% as businesses push for more in-person presence.

“Monitoring can help ensure employees complete tasks on time, reduce distractions, and increase overall productivity.” – Employers

Surveillance tools have become a default solution to bridge the gap, with employers increasingly relying on digital and physical monitoring to regain a sense of control. Yet, these measures often reflect a deeper issue: a lack of trust. Nearly half of employers admit they find it harder to manage employees remotely, while others outright question whether their teams can stay productive without direct supervision. For employees, this growing reliance on surveillance only deepens feelings of distrust.

Employees resist the return to the office amid surveillance concerns

While employers favor hybrid and in-office models, employees have a different perspective. Over 42% of workers would rather remain fully remote, even with monitoring in place, than return to an office full-time. Surveillance is a significant reason behind this reluctance. Around 44% of employees say they’re hesitant about heading back to the office, citing concerns over constant monitoring and invasive practices like biometric access controls.

This disconnect highlights a fundamental clash between employer expectations and employee preferences. While businesses see surveillance as a productivity tool, employees often interpret it as an invasion of privacy, creating a tense dynamic that’s difficult to reconcile.

The human cost of workplace surveillance

Workplace surveillance is reshaping how Americans feel about work itself. For many employees, constant oversight adds daily stress and anxiety, making them feel more like targets of suspicion than valued team members. While 40% of employees believe their employers try to balance monitoring with well-being, nearly a quarter (23%) feel these efforts ignore the mental health impacts entirely.

The numbers tell a clear story. Employees who face both online and physical monitoring report 45% higher stress levels than those in less-surveilled environments (28%). Instead of encouraging productivity, these practices are creating a culture of pressure and disengagement, leaving many workers feeling scrutinized rather than supported.

One-third of employees feel watched—and stressed

What workplace monitoring practices cause you the most stress or anxiety?

For nearly 33% of employees, the stress of constant surveillance has become part of their daily work experience. Many feel pressured to work faster, with 32% reporting fears of being labeled unproductive by monitoring tools like AI and biometric systems. This stress comes from the feeling of being watched as well as the uncertainty of how their actions are interpreted.

“I’m constantly wondering whether I’m being watched, and it’s stressful.” – Employees

Employees in workplaces with both online and physical monitoring face heightened challenges. Stress levels in these environments are 45% higher, compared to 28% in less monitored settings. This gap shows how invasive practices like real-time screen tracking or biometric data collection worsen employee well-being rather than enhance performance.

Monitoring pressures workers to prioritize speed over quality

For employees under constant surveillance, taking a break can feel risky. Nearly 24% admit they take fewer breaks, worried that stepping away might make them seem idle. This pressure affects the quality of their work. Employees feel compelled to prioritize speed over thoughtfulness, with 32% saying they feel rushed due to monitoring practices.

This creates a counterproductive cycle. While employers might expect surveillance to encourage better results, it often leads to burnout and disengagement instead. The fear of being judged—or misjudged—by AI systems amplifies these challenges, distorting how employees approach their roles.

Biometric surveillance sparks employee backlash 

For many employees, the collection of biometric data feels invasive. Nearly 21% strongly object to its implementation, while another 35% are somewhat likely to push back. These concerns are not unwarranted—56% of workers say that they now have heightened stress about privacy violations, particularly when sensitive information like facial recognition is involved.

“Biometric surveillance is a step too far for many employees: 21% would strongly object to its use, while 35% are somewhat likely to push back.”

Half of employees would consider quitting over workplace surveillance

Surveillance stress is pushing employees to their limits. Many workers don’t fully understand how much their employers are monitoring them, but they can feel its effects. While 69% of employees are aware that workplace surveillance is legal, many don’t grasp how extensively it’s being used within their own companies. Nearly a third (31%) say they’re unaware of the full scope of monitoring practices at their workplace. This lack of transparency leaves many feeling uneasy and wondering: What else don’t I know?

The disconnect goes deeper. Surveillance practices intended to enforce compliance often have the opposite effect, creating an environment where workers feel scrutinized and unsupported. Instead of fostering trust, these gaps in awareness and communication drive frustration. For some, it’s a quiet resistance, using tactics to game the system. For others, it’s the breaking point, with nearly half of employees willing to quit their jobs over intrusive monitoring.

“Surveillance makes me feel dehumanized and creates a lack of trust.” – Employees

Nearly 1 in 4 employees fake productivity to outsmart workplace surveillance

Nearly 24% of workers admit to using stealth tactics to fake productivity, highlighting how monitoring practices often backfire. Instead of encouraging genuine engagement, these tools shift the focus to avoiding detection.

Some of the most common tactics include keeping unnecessary apps or websites open (16%) and scheduling emails to mimic consistent activity (15%). Others log in from mobile devices (13%) or use tools like mouse jigglers (12%) to appear active. For some, even virtual backgrounds (12%) become part of the strategy to hide their location.

The breaking point: Privacy over pay

For many employees, workplace surveillance is a red line. Monitoring practices that cross into invasive territory, like tracking biometric data or private messages, push workers to re-evaluate their roles entirely. Nearly half of employees would consider quitting if surveillance increased. Among them, 17% said they’d be “very likely” to resign, while another 32% said they’d definitely consider it.

What’s more, many employees value their privacy so highly that they’d trade financial security for it. Nearly 24% of workers reported they’d be willing to take a pay cut—up to 25%—to avoid workplace monitoring. This willingness to sacrifice income underscores how deeply workers feel about the need for trust and autonomy in their professional lives.

Transparency isn’t enough to address privacy fears

But even as more companies disclose surveillance policies, employees remain skeptical. Employers may be more open about monitoring practices—86% now disclose them—but this isn’t easing concerns. Half (50%) of workers still suspect they’re being monitored without their knowledge.

“More than 77% of employees want companies to be legally required to disclose surveillance practices, with 78% calling for stricter state and federal regulation of workplace monitoring.”

This mistrust is fueling calls for stronger protections. Over 77% of employees believe that companies should be legally required to disclose all forms of surveillance. And it’s not just transparency they want. More than 78% support state and federal regulations to control how surveillance technology is used in the workplace.

For many, employees want accountability. They want assurance that these tools won’t overstep into unnecessary intrusions and that their data will be handled responsibly. Without these protections, workplaces risk alienating their employees further.

So, how can employers close the gap?

Surveillance doesn’t have to be a constant source of tension. Done right, it can balance accountability with respect for employees’ privacy. Here are three concrete steps employers can take:

• Clarify policies and limits: Employees shouldn’t have to decode vague statements about monitoring. Policies should clearly outline what is being tracked, how data is used, and who has access to it. For example, monitoring tools should focus on professional activities and avoid overreaching into private communication or non-work hours.
• Rethink why surveillance is used: Monitoring shouldn’t be a stand-in for trust. Companies need to move beyond tracking as a default response to productivity concerns. Instead, they should use data to inform smarter policies—such as identifying bottlenecks in workflows or offering tailored support to employees who need it.
• Prioritize well-being over control: Surveillance policies that drive anxiety or micromanagement hurt everyone. Employers should evaluate whether their tools are unintentionally undermining morale. For instance, real-time monitoring of screens or biometric tracking can be replaced with systems that measure outcomes, not constant activity, allowing employees the autonomy they need to thrive.

Ultimately, workplace surveillance goes beyond technology. It’s about the balance of power between employers and employees. When monitoring crosses the line into overreach, it damages morale, stifles creativity, and fuels resentment. Yet, done thoughtfully, surveillance can enhance operations without compromising dignity or trust.

“Employees are demanding accountability, transparency, and respect for their privacy. Employers who fail to address these concerns risk losing talent, productivity, and trust—not just in their workplace, but in their leadership.”

The choice is clear: Treat monitoring as a tool to support employees rather than control them. By aligning surveillance practices with fairness, well-being, and mutual respect, companies can move forward with confidence, retaining the loyalty and engagement of their teams. Anything less risks alienating the very people who drive their success.

Do you think workplace surveillance can ever strike the right balance between oversight and employee privacy? Or does it always tip the scales too far? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.