Location tracking of employee raises interesting legal issues

In an effort to dial back its current work-from-home culture, PricewaterhouseCoopers will start tracking where some of its employees work. It will start requiring its UK employees to spend a minimum of 3 days per week in the office and will use location data to manage their in-person attendance.

While there is nothing per se illegal about tracking employees in this manner, but I question whether it's a good HR practice. Indeed, there's quite the creep factor. How much will your employees mind Big Brother tracking all of their movements, and how will it impact morale?

And there still are some legal risks.

Maybe don’t forge texts if you want to win a lawsuit?

Andrea Rossbach, a registered nurse working at Montefiore Medical Center, claimed that her supervisor, Norman Morales, sexually harassed her. In support of her claim, she relied on a series of sexually harassing text messages Morales allegedly sent her, including messages in which he called her "hot," asked her to send him a photo of a G-string he gifted her.

Rossbach's claim, however, had one huge problem — the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that those text messages did not exist. She created them after the fact to use as evidence in her claim.

At her deposition, Rossbach testified that she could not produce screen shots of the text messages because she had initially received them on an old iPhone with a badly cracked screen, and that instead she had to take a photo of the texts with a newer iPhone X, which she had also later disposed of. 

What are the risks with the use of AI at work?

AI is shiny. AI is new. AI is sexy. And AI is problematic and not entirely understood. It is for those last reasons that, according to HR Brew, corporate America is either restricting employees' use of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT or banning them outright.

I don't have the answer for which of allowing, limiting, or banning generative AI is the correct answer for your business. You should, however, consider these three risks in evaluating whether, when, and how your employees use generative AI at work.

Federal agencies need to stay in their lanes

• National Labor Relations Board and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announce new partnership to address employer surveillance, monitoring, and data collection in the workplace


• Worker advocates call on OSHA to set standard on employee surveillance


• NLRB General Counsel may seek to invalidate non-compete clauses in employee severance agreements

These are just a few of headlines I've recently read in which one federal agency or another is signaling an intent to regulate outside of its core mission. Federal agencies should stay in their lanes, period. OSHA regulates workplace safety. The NLRB regulates the relationship between unions and management, and in non-union settings the rights of employees to engage in protected concerted activity.

Class action lawsuit highlights the risk of AI in hiring and other employment decisions

Yesterday, news broke of a class action lawsuit filed against HRIS provider Workday claiming that its artificial intelligence systems and screening tools disproportionately and discriminatorily disqualify Black, older, and disabled job applicants. 

The named plaintiff, Derek Mobley, is a Black man over the age of 40 who suffers from anxiety and depression. He alleges that he applied for 80-100 positions since 2018 that use Workday as a screening tool and has been denied every time despite his qualifications. 

Mobley claims that Workday's artificial intelligence unlawfully favors applicants outside of protected classes through its reliance on algorithms and inputs created by humans conscious and unconscious biases. 

If your surveilling employees, the NLRB is watching you

Wearable trackers. Security cameras. GPS trackers. Keyloggers. Live webcam monitoring. Technology has made it easier for employers to monitor and manage their employees' productivity and discipline employees who fall short of expectations. Moreover, technology makes it possible for employers to continue tracking employees after the workday ends via employer-issued cellphone or wearable devices, and apps installed in employees' own devices.  

Employers are monitoring employees, and the NLRB is monitoring employers' use of these monitoring technologies.

NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo just issued a memo on Electronic Monitoring and Algorithmic Management of Employees Interfering with the Exercise of Section 7 Rights.

Never say “nevermind” when child pornography is involved

You may not know who Spencer Elden is, but you almost certainly know what he looked like as a newborn. Spencer, in all of his glory, graces what is perhaps the most famous album cover of all time, or at least of the last 30 years — Nirvana's iconic grunge masterpiece, Nevermind.

Spencer Elden was also recently a plaintiff, as he sued Kurt Cobain's estate, Krist Novoselic, and Dave Grohl for child sexual exploitation based on their use of naked baby image. (He lost, btw, not once, but twice.)

While the lawsuit and its 30-year-old claim certainly seem like a b.s. money grab, it did get me thinking, do you know what to do if you discover child pornography in your workplace, on your network, or on one of your devices?

Here are four thoughts.

The wage and hour implications of employee electronic surveillance

Every now and again I come across a story that make me question how any in-house counsel blessed a workplace policy or practice.

The following story, taken from yesterday's episode of The Daily on the rise of workplace surveillance, is one of those stories.

Carol works as a Vice President for a bank. Like many white-collar employees these days, she's working remotely from her home. Pretty early on in her employment, she begins to notice that her paychecks are light. Then she figures out why.

Every 10 minutes at random points the company took a screenshot of her computer monitor and a photo of her face. The company was using that information to pay Carol (and every other worker) only for the minutes when they appeared be active according to the photos. If, for example, the photo happened to capture Carol during a moment of inactivity (for example, a 30-second interval when she went to get a cup of coffee), it would dock her for the entire 10-minute span. As you can imagine, the digital tracking actually missed a lot of Carol's work, including any work she did offline. She's working, but the company thinks she's not working, and it's going to dock for that any perceived increments of inactivity. 

There are two HUGE Fair Labor Standards Act red flags here.

I hate “Tattleware”

I thought I had my next Worst Employer nominee. News broke yesterday of the mass exodus of employees from real estate company CoStar after allegations came to light of the company spying on work-from-home employees through the cameras on the company-issued laptops. I even had the post written. 

But in further researching the issue I came across this story that ran yesterday on the Today Show: 'Tattleware': How your boss might be tracking your remote activity. 

Its use skyrocketed as most companies switched to a work-from-home model during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus Update 2-16-2021: Are you monitoring your remote employees?

According to this article at Wirecutter.com, employers are using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification to enhance their monitoring of employees' activities, specifically remote employees.

As COVID-19's spread has prompted an expansion of work-from-home policies across various industries, the use of more-pervasive monitoring software, also known as "tattleware" or "bossware," has increased. The New York Times demonstrated how this software works, but the idea is simple: Once the software is installed, an employer has deeper access and even live monitoring tools for everything you do on your computer, including which applications you open, what websites you visit, and how much time you spend doing different activities. Employers can use this data to track your attendance or periodically snap screenshots of your screen. Some software can even monitor the music you listen to, your facial expressions, your tone of voice, or your writing tone throughout the day. To what purpose depends on the type of work you do—and whom you do it for.

According to Brian Kropp, VP of Research for Gartner, the number of companies that use this "tattleware" has increased from 10 percent pre-COVID to 30 percent currently. It's an epidemic all on its own.

“I’m here live. I am not a cat.”

If you were on the internet yesterday, you likely came across the story of the lawyer who accidentally presented as cat during a Zoom court hearing. The Texas lawyer had accidentally left on a cat filter during a video conference call and was unable to turn it off.

“I’m here live, I’m not a cat,” says lawyer after Zoom filter mishap

“I can see that,” responds judge pic.twitter.com/HclKlAUwbM

— Lawrence Hurley (@lawrencehurley) February 9, 2021

While this story provided everyone a much-needed laugh, it does offer two important points: one about a lawyer's ethical duty of technological competence, and another about the importance of a sense of humor and empathy.

What “Sexy Vixen Vinyl” teaches us about porn at work

If you’re Fox News reporter Brit Hume, you have a lot of explaining to do. Yesterday, the venerable journalist carelessly tweeted out his internet exploration of “Sexy Vixen Vinyl.”

As sure as today is Cyber Monday, your employees are shopping from work

Today is Cyber Monday, the biggest online shopping day of the holiday season. In fact, it is estimated that today will be the biggest online shopping day ever, with over $9.4 billion in sales.

And, guess what? Given that most of those doing the shopping will be spending the majority of their prime shopping hours at work, from where do you think they will be making most of their Cyber Monday purchases.

Must you tell employees when you are surveilling their devices?

It’s unusual these days for an employee not to have a device issued by their employer, or on which they can access their employer’s information — cell phones, tablets, laptops, and other computing devices.

Conventional wisdom (California notwithstanding), is that if the employer owns the device, the employee has zero privacy rights in that device, its use, or the information stored on it.

That conventional wisdom, however, might be changing.

Is blockchain technology the next frontier in combating sexual harassment?

According to Employee Benefit News, Vault Platform has developed an app that uses blockchain technology to allow employees to document and report workplace sexual harassment on their smartphones.

“Interesting,” you say,” but what’s blockchain technology?”

Emojis are starting to pop up in discrmination and harassment cases 🤔🤷‍♂️

Law.com recently pronounced, "The Emojis are Coming!" That article got me thinking, are they coming to workplace litigation, too? After all, emojis are a form of communication, and work is all about communication. Which would suggest that we would start seeing them in harassment and discrimination cases.

According to Bloomberg Law, mentions of emojis in federal discrimination lawsuits doubled from 2016 to 2017. Let's not get crazy. The doubling went from six cases to 12 cases. But, a trend is a trend.

How to recover a stolen computer from an ex-employee in seven easy steps

As many as 60% of employees who are laid-off, fired, or quit admit to stealing company data. Sometimes, they download information on their way out the door. Sometimes they email information to a personal email account. And sometimes they simply fail to return a company laptop or other device that contains the data. In the latter case, it costs an average of $50,000 for an employer to replace a stolen computer, with 80% of that cost coming from the recovery of sensitive, confidential, and proprietary information.

When you put this data together, it becomes increasingly apparent that businesses must take proactive steps to protect their technology and data.

What can you learn from the law firm partner suspended for watching porn at work?

According to The American Lawyer (sub. req.), Hogan Lovells has suspended one of its partners in its London office for watching porn at work. How did it catch the offense?

In IT employee read his internet logs? No.

He forgot to close his browser when he went to the loo and his assistant walked into his office? No.

He visited an unsafe site that spammed his entire office with malware? No.

Are "digital addiction" claims about to invade your workplace?

There is no doubt that addiction is a protected disability under the ADA (and Ohio's parallel law).

Typically, we think of addiction as relating to drugs or alcohol. But, there's a new wave of addictions on the horizon—digital addictions.

Can and should you ban employee phone use at work?

Last night, the fam packed up the Hyman-mobile and headed out to see Jack White. It was my 7th time seeing him in any of his incarnations (White Stripes - 4; Raconteurs - 1; Solo - 2, if you’re counting), and he never disappoints. This time, however, was different in one key aspect. Jack has banned all phones from his tour. That means no in-venue selfies, no grainy photos or crunchy videos, and no one staring down at a five-inch screen instead of watching the artist on stage. It was a different, and pleasant, way to experience a concert in 2018, an experience I had not had in what feels like a decade. Instead of at least partly focusing on my phone, I focused 100 percent on the artist and his performance.

Which begs the question: can and should you ban cell phones at work?