A major Brazilian bank has just fired more than 1,000 employees in São Paulo over long periods of inactivity on their work computers. This surprising move comes amid growing debates about how productivity is measured in today’s hybrid work environments.
The bank Itaú, Brazil’s largest private financial institution, made the decision after an internal report tracked employee computer activity for six months. They found some workers had stretches of up to four hours entirely without any computer input during the workday. For many, it’s sparked urgent questions about balancing efficiency and employee rights in a changing workplace.
How the bank monitored employee productivity
China invests $5.6 billion in Morocco to build Africa’s first of its kind
3 daily habits that make gray hair appear faster — and many people don’t know it
Itaú employs more than 95,000 people worldwide, with 85,775 based in Brazil. According to the bank, roughly 40% of its workforce works onsite, mainly those in customer-facing roles. The remaining 60% operate under a hybrid model, requiring them to be physically present at least eight times per month.
To assess productivity in this mixed setup, Itaú relied heavily on monitoring the activity of employees’ computers. When no keyboard or mouse movement was detected for extended periods—sometimes exceeding four hours—that counted as inactivity. The bank said such lengthy gaps indicated a lack of engagement serious enough to justify termination.
This computer monitoring became a major factor in evaluating remote employee performance during the pandemic-driven shift away from traditional offices.
Why the bank defends its decision
Itaú describes the layoffs as part of a broader effort to improve internal efficiency and adapt to new economic challenges including pressure on profit margins. “Hybrid work has brought new opportunities but also new management challenges,” the company said in a statement. “It’s our responsibility to make sure company resources are being used effectively.”
The bank considers the computer inactivity a clear sign of underperformance, seeing the long idle periods as unacceptable in a professional setting. It also emphasized the need to enforce accountability in a hybrid work model where traditional supervision is limited.
In Itaú’s view, these measures help ensure fairness and productivity across all employee groups, whether working remotely or onsite.
Workers and unions push back hard
Neither in the fridge nor in the open air: discover the best place to store strawberries
Man reunites with his dog after a month—thanks to a surprise adoption event
Unsurprisingly, this sweeping response has met with fierce resistance from unions and employee representatives. The São Paulo Bank Workers Federation condemned the bank’s use of computer inactivity as a measurement tool, calling it overly simplistic and out of touch with how remote work truly functions.
They argue that many work tasks don’t involve constant keyboard or mouse use. For instance, employees may be participating in long phone meetings, reviewing printed documents, or collaborating offline with colleagues during those seemingly “inactive” moments.
The union also raised concerns about technical glitches that could lead to false inactivity reports, as well as legitimate breaks needed during long screen hours to protect health.
Moreover, critics claim the bank’s surveillance approach crosses into invasive monitoring. Remote work shouldn’t become an excuse for excessive digital oversight or covert spying, they warn.
The battle over worker rights in a digital economy
This incident underscores a larger tension happening worldwide as companies and workers adjust to hybrid and remote work models. How do you measure productivity fairly when employees aren’t sitting at desks under direct supervision?
I personally experienced the challenge of remote work during the pandemic, juggling distractions and sometimes needing to pause my computer to think deeply or discuss tasks on calls without clicking keys. In such moments, inactivity on a device doesn’t mean no work was happening.
The São Paulo union announced plans to pursue legal action, demanding the reinstatement of those fired and a formal dialogue with management to establish clear, transparent performance criteria suitable for hybrid arrangements.
This situation at Itaú highlights the urgent need for balanced policies that respect both employee dignity and company goals in our rapidly evolving work culture.
What do you think—is monitoring computer activity a reasonable way to gauge productivity, or does it risk unfairly penalizing workers? Share your thoughts below and join the conversation on this pressing topic.