Protection of Employees’ Personal Information under Workplace Surveillance
- 1 University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
Abstract
By analyzing the civil litigation cases involving workplace video surveillance in China, it is founded that the courts have taken a more lenient altitude to the action of workplace video surveillance, and paid less attention to the personal information rights of employees that may be damaged by this action, resulting a low efficacy of litigation relief. In addition, based on management rights, the “implied consent” rules and excessive surveillance of employers violate the rules of personal information handling. The special protection of employees’ personal information can help maintain the dignity of employees, enhance the interests of the employer, and re-correct employees’ unfavorable positions in the labor relationships. To solve these issues and improve protection of employees’ personal information, this paper proposes two suggestions based on the critical reference to the experience and judgments in overseas similar cases. Specifically, to clarify the principle of handling workplace information, an information processing rule is proposed, which takes the principle of proportionality as the core. Additionally, the public interest litigation should be considered as a way to improve the remedy of employees’ rights, and thereby improve the effectiveness of protection of employees’ personal information.
- Article 29 Working Party (2002). Working Party Working Document on Surveillance and Monitoring of Electronic Communications in the Workplace. https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2002/wp55_en.pdf
- Bueckert, M. R. (2009). Electronic Employee Monitoring: Potential Reform Options. Manitoba Law Journal, 6, 99-116.
- Ciocchetti, C. A. (2011). The Eavesdropping Employer: A Twenty-First Century Framework for Employee Monitoring. American Business Law Journal, 48, 285-369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1714.2011.01116.x
- Determann, L., & Sprague, R. (2011). Intrusive Monitoring: Employee Privacy Expectations Are Reasonable in Europe, Destroyed in the United States. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 26, 979-1036.
- Ding, X. (2021). Personal Information Protection: Principle and Practice. Law Press.
- Han, X. (2021). The Dilemma and Solution of Informed-Consent Rule in Personal Information Protection—On the Relevant Provisions of the Personal Information Protection Law. Business and Economic Law Review, No. 1, 50.
- Jiang, H. (2021). Paradigm Shifts in the Application of the Proportionality Principle. Social Sciences in China, No. 4, 107.
- Karanja, S. K. (2009). Privacy and Protection of Marginalized Social Groups. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology, 2, 21-22. https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1063
- Levin, A. (2009). Dignity in The Workplace: An Enquiry into the Conceptual Foundation of Workplace Privacy Protection Worldwide. ALSB Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 11, 63-103.
- Levin, A., Foster, M., Nicholson, M. J., & Hernandez, T. (2006). Under the Radar? The Employer Perspective on Workplace Privacy. Centre for Study of Commercial Activities Research Report.
- Li, P. (2022). Dignity, Happiness and Freedom: The Value Orientation of the Labor View of the Communist Party of China in the New Era. Journal of Northwest University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 52, 37-46.
- Li, S. (2011). Economic Logic Hidden in Law-Economic Analysis of Law and Its Theoretical Expression. Academics, No. 8, 71.
- Pang, X. Z. (2021). Civil Law Protection of Personal Information in the Era of Big Data. Open Access Library Journal, 8, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1108016
- Schiemann, A. (2014). BGH, Beschlussvom29. 1. 2014-1 StR 654/13. Juristische Rundschau, No. 7, 299-306. https://doi.org/10.1515/juru-2014-0048