New York employers that monitor or otherwise intercept their employees’ electronic usage, access, or communication using any electronic devices or systems need to make sure they are following a state law enacted last year, which takes effect very soon. By Saturday, May 7, as explained in full detail here, all employers must comply with
Next month, New Jersey private employers will need to start informing drivers before using GPS tracking devices in the vehicles they operate. A new state law that becomes effective April 18, 2022, requires employers to provide written notice to employees before using “electronic or mechanical devices” that are “designed or intended to be used for the sole purpose of tracking the movement of a vehicle, person, or device.” The notification requirement applies to both employer-owned or -leased and personal vehicles.
Continue Reading Considering Tracking Employees in Vehicles? New Jersey Now Requires Employers to Provide Notice
As of December 11, 2021, the Bill regulating employers’ use of automated employment decision tools has been enacted. Compliance with the Bill’s requirements begins January 1, 2023.
***
Joining Illinois and Maryland, on November 10, 2021, the New York City Council approved a measure, Int. 1894-2020A (the “Bill”), to regulate employers’ use of “automated employment decision tools” with the aim of curbing bias in hiring and promotions. The Bill, which is awaiting Mayor DeBlasio’s signature, is to take effect on January 1, 2023. Should the Mayor not sign the Bill within thirty days of the Council’s approval (i.e., by December 10), absent veto, it will become law.
Part 8 of a series featuring our video Rules of the Road: Return to Work in the Time of COVID-19.
If there has been one, singular guiding principle or mantra that has sustained us, challenged us, and in some cases, inspired us over these last few months, this is it: “Don’t Waste the Crisis.” It
As we have previously blogged, use of third-party digital hiring platforms to select job applicants using video interviews can present an array of potential legal issues. A recent Complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) by a consumer advocacy organization, Electronic Privacy Information Center (“EPIC”), illustrates some of those potential pitfalls. EPIC asks
We have long counseled employers using or contemplating using artificial intelligence (“AI”) algorithms in their employee selection processes to validate the AI-based selection procedure using an appropriate validation strategy approved by the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (“Uniform Guidelines”). Our advice has been primarily based on minimizing legal risk and complying with best practices.
The recently proposed amendment to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) should be a wake up call to those employers who are not already actively planning for the January 1, 2020 compliance deadline.
The amendment reaffirms that employers must (i) provide employees with notice of the categories of personal information collected and the purposes for
This edition of Take 5 highlights compliance with cutting-edge issues—such as pay equity, workplace violence, and artificial intelligence (“AI”)—that have a significant impact on retailers. We also provide an update on National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) compliance and New York City drug testing to assist you in navigating an increasingly complex legal landscape.
Watercooler (and
Increasingly companies are using third-party digital hiring platforms to recruit and select job applicants. These products, explicitly or implicitly, promise to reduce or eliminate the bias of hiring managers in making selection decisions. Instead, the platforms grade applicants based on a variety of purportedly objective factors. For example, a platform may scan thousands of resumes
As we previously reported, since 2017 employees have filed dozens of employment class actions claiming violations of Illinois’ 2008 Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”). In short, BIPA protects the privacy rights of employees, customers, and others in Illinois against the improper collection, usage, storage, transmission, and destruction of biometric information, including biometric identifiers,