New York may soon restrict employers and employment agencies from using fully-automated decision making tools to screen job candidates or make other employment decisions that impact the compensation, benefits, work schedule, performance evaluations, or other terms of employment of employees or independent contractors. Draft Senate Bill 7623, introduced August 4, aims to limit the use of such tools and requires human oversight of certain final decisions regarding hiring, promotion, termination, disciplinary, or compensation decisions. Senate Bill…
Since October 11, 2022, employers who electronically monitor their employees with more than 25 employees in Ontario have been required to have a written electronic monitoring policy in place pursuant to Ontario’s Employment Standards act, 2000 (“ESA”), as amended by Ontario’s Bill 88, Working for Workers Act, 2022 (“Bill 88”). However, employers have largely been left to decide how best to introduce and structure these policies given the recency of the law. Some common questions…
In early May, private sector employers in New York will face new disclosure requirements for electronic monitoring of employees. Beginning May 7, 2022, New York will join Connecticut and Delaware among the states that now require employers to provide written notice to new hires who are subject to electronic monitoring. These new disclosure requirements come after Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law amendments to Civil Rights Chapter 6, Article 5, Section 52-C*2. Hereâs what New York…
Click here to download. Data is an asset. Many of todayâs successful companies are based on data-driven business models. Big tech businesses are naturally leading the way, but across all sectors businesses are under pressure to leverage or monetize data. Monetizing data can be done in various ways, such as personalizing products or services, making manufacturing or logistic processes more efficient, automating tasks and operations, engaging in targeted advertising and improving internal systems, just to…
The European Court of Human Rights (âECHRâ) recently issued a judgment on the hot topic of employee monitoring in the case of Barbulescu v Romania. In this instance, the majority of judges (in a 6:1 judgment) held that an employeeâs right to âprivate lifeâ and âcorrespondenceâ had not been violated by the employer who had accessed the contents of the employee’s work-related instant messaging account. The Underlying DisputeMr Barbulescu, a Romanian national, worked for a private…
On February 5, 2016 the German data protection authorities, issued guidance (available in German) for private sector organisations explaining when and how an employer may monitor its employeesâ work email account and Internet usage (“Guidance”). German employers would be wise to structure their monitoring activities to comply with the Guidance. 1. Threshold QuestionThe applicable legal framework, which determines whether and how an employer may monitor its employeesâ work email accounts and Internet usage, depends on…
The monitoring of employees is a poignant example of an activity that requires a balance between the interests of different parties. On the one hand, organizations have a legitimate interest in safeguarding their information. Organizations can invest a significant amount of time and resources securing valuable data from external threats, only to have these efforts thwarted by the careless or intentional actions of an employee. Indeed, a study found that 29 percent of data breaches…