The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing privacy questions involving NASA and whether federal employers have too much leeway when it comes to
just as
to its Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG) next month.
Potentially,
this year.
The draft law seeks to amend the German Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG) by adding provisions in nine key subject areas, including medical exams, CCTV use, employee tracking, biometrics and monitoring employees’ Internet, e-mail and telephone use. In several cases, such actions are prohibited or require employee knowledge and consent, according to the draft law's provisions.
Eastman Kodak Chief Security and Privacy Officer Brian O’Connor, CIPP, shared insights into Germany’s proposed law with the Daily Dashboard, pointing out that while many parts of the legislation balance employee and employer interests, such issues as addressing information gathered for criminal or misconduct investigations may need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
In terms of areas of concern, O’Connor explained that in his role as a chief security and privacy officer, there could be issues with new limits on conducting undisclosed video surveillance.
"While it's rare that we would need to do that, there are some situations where that's the only way to identify the perpetrator" in cases such as workplace theft, he explained. He said he hopes the German Parliament will examine whether additional exceptions should be included for specific situations to investigate misconduct and crime.
O'Connor also noted that one summary of the proposed law indicates employers would be allowed to collect data to use in the course of an investigation of a crime, as is currently the case, while also adding a provision for suspicion of serious misconduct.
"I think that’s incredibly important for companies to be able to investigate--without prior notification to an employee--to get useful proof of either innocence or guilt," he said.
In summary, O'Connor said he believes the proposed changes "do a pretty good job of balancing the employees' interest in data privacy issues with the employers' interest in managing their businesses appropriately,” noting that some are actually mirroring laws in place in the U.S., such as the restriction regarding medical exams prior to hiring only being allowed in cases where it must be determined whether an employee can handle the demands of the job.
Medical information, however, is raising privacy questions in the U.S. at the government employment level.
On the U.S. side of the employer-employee privacy law equation, the
that, "The Supreme Court seemed unwilling Tuesday to restrict the government's ability to investigate the people who want to work inside its installations in the post-9/11 world, despite concerns that federal officials could go too far when prying into people's private lives in name of safety."
Dan Stormer, who is representing 28 scientists and engineers who were contractors for NASA, however, shared a different view.
As he put it, with "low-risk or no-risk employees, the government doesn't need to know."
