Rockstar’s Watchful Eye: The Curious Case of Employee Surveillance

Dayne Oram, a former Rockstar North worker, testified at an employment tribunal in Glasgow that he believed employees who signed a 2023 petition about remote working were placed on a “watch list” after the company’s leadership received it. The petition was part of a larger effort by employees to push for more flexible work arrangements.

Oram and his colleagues claimed they were dismissed in 2025 due to their trade union activity, but Rockstar disputes this, stating that the firings resulted from gross misconduct related to sharing confidential company information on a Discord forum. Oram acknowledged that discussions on the Discord forum could become heated and unprofessional, which may have led to the sharing of sensitive information.

However, he also hinted at a possible connection between the list of employees who signed the remote working petition and the eventual firings. The fact that 141 out of 154 employees who signed the petition were not fired raises questions about whether Rockstar’s actions were truly justified.

Rockstar maintains it has been unfairly maligned by Oram’s claims, but this case highlights a broader concern about employee surveillance in the tech industry. As companies increasingly rely on digital platforms to facilitate communication among employees, there is a risk that sensitive information may be shared inadvertently or intentionally.

The tribunal’s findings will have significant implications for employee rights in the tech industry. If Oram’s claims are substantiated, it could establish a precedent for trade union activity and collective bargaining within companies like Rockstar Games. On the other hand, if Rockstar is vindicated, it may set a worrying precedent for employers to closely monitor employee communication, potentially stifling free speech and creativity.

The case against Rockstar Games is not an isolated incident; rather, it reflects a broader pattern of employee surveillance and suppression in the tech industry. As companies like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft face growing scrutiny over worker rights and conditions, we must consider whether Rockstar Games’ actions are part of a larger trend.

Rockstar’s defense hinges on the idea that employees shared confidential information on a Discord forum, which led to their dismissal. However, this raises questions about how companies like Rockstar should balance employee surveillance with worker rights and free speech. As technology continues to shape the modern workplace, we must consider the implications of employee monitoring on creativity, productivity, and job satisfaction.

The case highlights the importance of union recognition in protecting workers’ rights. Oram’s testimony suggests that employees who signed the remote working petition may have been targeted for their trade union activity. If this is true, it raises concerns about whether Rockstar Games is genuinely committed to recognizing and respecting employee unions.

As the video game industry continues to grow and evolve, one thing is certain: employee relations will be increasingly scrutinized. Rockstar Games’ handling of this case will have significant implications for the industry as a whole. Will companies like Rockstar prioritize worker rights and free speech, or will they continue down a path of surveillance and suppression?

The fate of 31 dismissed employees hangs in the balance, but the true cost of Rockstar’s actions may be far greater: the erosion of trust between employers and employees, the stifling of creativity, and the perpetuation of a culture of fear. As we await the tribunal’s findings, one thing is clear: this case will leave an indelible mark on the video game industry – and on our understanding of employee surveillance in the digital age.