California’s Supreme Court Holds that Employees Have No Expectation of Privacy where Employer Secretly Videotaped Their Workplace

In an August 2009 decision, California’s Supreme Court held that an employer may secretly videotape its employee’s workspace without notifying the employees in advance and that this conduct does not invade the employee’s reasonable expectation of privacy. (Hernandez v. Hillsides, Inc. (2009) 97 Cal. Rptr. 3d 274)

The employer, Hillsides Children Center provided residential facilities for neglected and abused children, learned that some of its computers had been used to access pornographic websites during late night and early morning hours. Although the plaintiffs, Abigail Hernandez and Maria-Jose Lopez, were not suspected of the illicit activity, their director set up a hidden camera in plaintiffs’ office. The camera was activated at night when the plaintiffs left work and was turned off before they returned the next day, and the surveillance lasted about three weeks. Notably, no inappropriate conduct was found during the surveillance and no suspect was caught. However when the plaintiffs discovered the hidden camera, they sued Hillsides for invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress.

The Court examined the extensive history of workplace privacy issues and prior case decisions which have held that (1) there must be a reasonable expectation of privacy which was invaded by the conduct, and (2) the conduct must be sufficiently serious or offensive as to breach social norms.

Under the facts presented, the Supreme Court first noted that the plaintiffs did have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their workspace even though they shared an office, other employees had frequent access to the office, and that the inside of the office could be viewed from the hallway. Nonetheless, the Court was more attuned to the second prong – that the videotaping was narrowly limited in place, time, and scope, was based on legitimate business concerns, and that the plaintiffs were never actually videotaped during working hours.

Interestingly, the Court did not require that employer use the least intrusive means to curtail the alleged conduct. As noted in the decision, the employer could have stopped the pornographic website viewing by simply requiring all employees to log off of their computers at the end of the day. But, more importantly, the Court did not suddenly open the door for employers to secretly videotape employees: “Nothing we say here is meant to encourage such surveillance measures, particularly in the absence of adequate notice to persons within camera range that their actions may be viewed and taped.”

This decision provides a cautionary tale for both employers and employees. California employers must be very careful in deciding to monitor their employees’ activities where there is no legitimate business need. California employees can still take heart that even in a private place of business they have reasonable expectation of privacy in their workspace and may not be arbitrarily monitored by their employer.

Read more

wage theft lawyer

Oakland Restaurant Settles Wage Theft Lawsuit With Former Workers

Certain types of workplaces are more prone to wage theft, and the restaurant industry is one of them. Not being paid minimum wage, being forced to work without any breaks and not…

READ ARTICLE
workplace sexual harassment lawyer

Six Women Sue Tesla For Sexual Harassment at Fremont Factory

Six current and former female employees filed separate lawsuits accusing Tesla of enabling a workplace culture of “rampant” sexual harassment at its factory in Fremont, California. The company allegedly created a work…

READ ARTICLE
wage theft lawyer

Bay Area Burger King Franchisee cited $1.9 Million For Wage Theft

Fast food restaurants are notorious for their aggressive cost-cutting measures to boost profits, which often result in workers not being paid the full wages they are owed. It is important to hold…

READ ARTICLE
wrongful termination lawyer

Former Walmart Pharmacist Gets 27 Million Dollars in Retaliation Lawsuit

A former Walmart pharmacist was awarded $27.5 million in damages after the District Court of Central California found the company wrongfully terminated her in retaliation for complaining about noncompliance issues. She and…

READ ARTICLE
SEEN ON
cnnmoney
marin-ij
dailypost
news10