This is exactly the Overton window I mentioned.

Your opinion/take on this is relatively new. While technically (legally) correct, there was a whole lot of social pushback on this statement or idea even in my lifetime.

This take on workplace privacy has not been the social standard for very long, and is certainly not a universally shared opinion.

Edit: To avoid comment spam here on an irrelevant side-subject. I didn't say it was a regression or a bad thing. I simply am pointing out it has massively shifted in a relatively short period of time. There was serious public debate about introducing these at all just a generation ago. Now it's seen as completely normal to have your entire workday recorded with zero expectation of privacy. It's a rather drastic shift in society.

Are we willing to have our cubicle conversations recorded while we’re on the job to increase the data available in the event of a software defect?

While I value my privacy at the office, these kinds of comparisons need a bit more work to become apples-to-apples. Consider:

1: Are we clicking buttons that could kill hundreds of customers without any chance of it being stopped by external oversight and review? To underscore the danger, is the cubicle secured by an anti-terrorist door which was installed after thousands died when terrorists attacked a similar cubicle before?

2. Are the recordings specially sequestered and regularly overwritten by default, as opposed to being kept indefinitely in a big database for anybody in my reporting chain to look at on a whim?

_____

For example, if I was "coding" inside the control room of a nuclear power plant and developing scripts to help automate the next hour of control-rod movements, I think I would be wayyyy more accepting of a 24-hour disaster recording loop in a box for the US Department of Energy.

Don't forget frequently leaked out of context, for all the laymen and public to gawk at, and cast judgement upon those involved. "This is normal" say industry experts, "and your second quote is missing some very important context. None of which most HR departments will hear about, leaving me objectively worse off searching for a new job."

Tech-bros will read this and say nobody died due to their software, but that's neither true nor the point. Giving every supposedly private interaction at work a chance to leak only sounds reasonable when it's not you

It depends. Are people’s lives at stake?

Are you willing to have a camera pointed at you - not other drivers, you - as you drive to and from work every day? People's lives are at stake, driving is objectively more dangerous than flying, and it can be tied to work by the simple reason that you wouldn't be behind the wheel if you weren't heading to or from work.

This smacks of "Privacy for me but not for thee", to say nothing of the effect it would have on the perpetual low-level pilot shortage due to things like working conditions.

It depends. Am I at work and being paid as a professional driver?

> the perpetual low-level pilot shortage due to things like working conditions.

There are a lot of pilots “waiting in the wings” at smaller carriers, currently being paid peanuts, to get nice cushy jobs at major carriers with union protections who won’t mind having their voice recorded and stored for 24 hours while on the job behind the yokes.

The vast majority of pilots at those regional carriers are already represented by a union: ALPA.*1

That union opposes cockpit video monitoring and has opposed the extension of CVR recordings.*2

*1 - https://www.alpa.org/en/about-alpa/our-pilot-groups

*2 - https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-proposes-extending-cockpit-voi...

Any Zoom or Slack communication is recorded and available...so is this not the state we're in today?

This is not just the state of things in most companies, but it is a legal requirement in companies subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

fwiw I don't particularly like either state of affairs, but pragmatically some business interns somewhere at JP Morgan has all of their communication recorded and preserved for regulatory oversight, the fact that pilots don't is a testament to their union, and not because it wouldn't be considered normal in today's working world.

The pilots have a union. A lot of people here seem to like the idea of unions. The union negotiates with the airlines (and FAA) over working conditions, rules, and terms. The pilots have privacy concerns about the voice recordings, the union negotiated that, and the compromise was the two-hour recording.