With the current limited exemptions under CCPA for employment and business-to-business related information set to expire January 1, 2021, there is uncertainty over when businesses should prepare to extend CCPA compliance efforts to this type of information. However, a pending amendment in the California senate, and/or the impending CPRA ballot initiative in November may bring clarity to the issue.
Continue Reading What Will Come First: Pending CCPA Amendment Could Clarify Key Exemptions

As we move into the second quarter of 2020, governments around the country are analyzing how to best open up their economies. Part of this will include people returning to work, restaurants, retail establishments, and other places of public accommodation. Landlords, business owners, and others want to know how to take steps to reopen safely while government mitigation efforts are being developed to help slow the spread of COVID-19 until a vaccine is developed. And where authorities don’t have specific mitigation efforts, instituting protocols will fall squarely on landlords, business owners, and those who operate places of public accommodation.
Continue Reading Taking Temperatures During COVID-19: A Practical Toolkit

January 1, 2020, organizations that employ individuals based in Illinois will need to keep in mind the Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act. This Act sets forth new requirements for video-recorded interviews using AI to analyze such recordings. The law is not limited to just Illinois residents. It applies to applicants for positions based in Illinois. While brief, and without any definitions, the Act requires three things before using AI technology in video interviews.
Continue Reading New Artificial Intelligence Law for Illinois Employers in January 2020

One of the amendments we’ve been watching over the past months is one that impacts rights of employees —both the company’s and other company’s employees. Under AB25, which passed the California Senate and is now awaiting governor signature, companies will be (for a year) exempted from providing current and former employees, job applicants, and contractors with the full suite of CCPA rights. Starting January 2020, however, these individuals must be provided with notice of information use. Access and deletion rights will not go into effect until January 2021.
Continue Reading What To Do About Employees Under CCPA: An Update

Washington State will have new restrictions on what employers can ask applicants regarding their wage and salary history starting July 28, 2019. The new legislation will prohibit employers from seeking wage or salary history from job applicants in the state. Additionally, employers will not be able to require that an applicant’s prior salary history meet certain criteria. There are some limited exceptions to this general rule. First, employer can confirm an applicant’s wage or salary if the applicant has voluntarily disclosed that history. Second, the employer can confirm the information after having negotiated and made an employment offer.
Continue Reading Washington Enacts Restrictions on Applicant Wage and Salary Questions

In response to the concern of many that the definition of consumer is so broad as to cover employees, a bill has been introduced in California to exclude employees from the scope of CCPA. As those who have been following CCPA are aware, the definition of “consumer” is extremely broad. Under the proposal, amended on March 25 of this year, the definition would specifically exclude from the definition information collected by a business “in the course of a person acting as a job applicant,” employee, contractor, or agent of the business. The carve-out goes on to clarify that this would hold true only if the individual’s information is used “for purposes compatible with the context” in which they gave it to the company.
Continue Reading Will CCPA’s Definition of Consumer Be Narrowed?

A lawsuit against US Cold Storage under the Biometric Information Privacy Act was recently dismissed because, the court held, the violations of the law were merely technical. As a result, the plaintiff did not have sufficient standing. This decision echoes the other cases we have reported on recently.
Continue Reading No Federal Court Standing for BIPA Violation Without Injury

Last month a federal district court dismissed a putative class action lawsuit against United Airlines challenging its use of fingerprint scanning timeclocks. The lawsuit brought by United employee David Johnson alleged that the company’s collection and use of employees’ fingerprints violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) because the company failed to get the requisite consent from its employees for fingerprint collection and use.
Continue Reading BIPA Claims Against United Airlines Must be Arbitrated Due to Collective Bargaining Agreement

In continuing our series on biometrics, we conclude with an analysis of protection requirements and risks. Illinois, Texas, and Washington—the three states which have thus far implemented specific biometric privacy laws—each require companies to reasonably protect biometric data in their possession. Illinois and Texas have further specified that the data must be protected to the same degree as other confidential and secret information. All three states require that the data be destroyed within a fixed amount of time.
Continue Reading Biometric Breakdown Part IV – Protecting

We’ve looked in our series to what companies should do when collecting biometric information, and now we turn to issues around sharing biometric information. The three states which have thus far enacted specific biometric privacy legislation—Illinois, Texas, and Washington—each place restrictions upon the sharing of biometric information. Illinois has imposed a blanket prohibition upon the sale of biometric information. The information may be shared if needed to complete a financial transaction authorized by the individual, if required by law, or, if the individual provides consent, for any other purpose.
Continue Reading Biometric Breakdown Part III – Sharing

Continuing our series, we look today at what a company should think about when collecting biometric data. Three U.S. states—Illinois, Texas, and Washington—have laws on-point. The Illinois statute is the most specific requiring written notice disclosing the purpose of collection and the length of time biometric information will be stored. It also requires companies to obtain each individual’s written consent. Texas requires companies to inform individuals of collection and obtain consent, but neither must be written. In Washington, companies may either give notice, obtain consent, or “prevent the subsequent use of a biometric identifier for a commercial purpose.” Companies in compliance with the Illinois law would also satisfy the other states’ less specific requirements.
Continue Reading Biometric Breakdown Part II – Collection