California Assembly Proposes Data Privacy Law for Workers
Time 3 Minute Read

As reported in the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives Blog:

Assembly Bill 1651, or the Workplace Technology Accountability Act, a new bill proposed by California Assembly Member Ash Kalra, would regulate employers and their vendors regarding the use of employee data. Under the bill, data is defined as “any information that identifies, relates to, describes, is reasonably capable of being associated with, or could reasonably be linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular worker, regardless of how the information is collected, inferred, or obtained.”  Examples of data include personal identity information; biometric information; health, medical, lifestyle, and wellness information; any data related to workplace activities; and online information. The bill confers certain data rights on employees, including the right to access and correct their data. 

Specifically, employers that control the collection of employee data would be required to inform employees of how the employer plans to collect and use employee data at or before the point of collection. There are multiple explicit requirements; for instance, employers would have to notify employees as to (1) the specific categories of employee data to be collected, the purpose for which the specific categories of employee data are collected or used and whether and how the data is related to the employee’s essential job functions; (2) whether and how the data will be used to make or assist an employment-related decision, including any associated benchmarks; (3) whether the information is being disclosed or otherwise transferred to a vendor or other third party, the name of the vendor or third party and for what purpose; and (4) the employee’s right to access and correct their data, among other things.

The bill also obligates an employer that collects or uses employee data to provide, upon request of an employee, the specific data that the employer retains about the employee’s work, the sources of data and the purpose for collecting the employee data. Additionally, under the bill, an employee has the right to request that an employer correct any inaccurate employee data about the employee that the employer maintains. After receiving such a request to correct inaccurate employee data, the employer must initiate an investigation and correct the data if it determines the at-issue data to be inaccurate. 

The elements of the bill mentioned above are only a few of the obligations and requirements that would be realized upon its passage. If passed, the bill likely would control over the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) (as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”)) with respect to employees’ privacy rights. Until at least January 1, 2023, the CCPA/CPRA exempts certain HR data from most of the law’s requirements.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

California has introduced Assembly Bill 2244, proposing a pioneering “California Certified” labeling standard for foods not classified as ultra-processed. The bill relies on forthcoming regulatory definitions and imposes retail placement requirements for qualifying products. As California continues to advance UPF regulation, this initiative is expected to shape food law trends nationwide.

Time 1 Minute Read

As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives blog, SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making.

Time 1 Minute Read

The California Consumer Privacy Act continues to drive significant enforcement activity—particularly when minors’ data is involved. In a recent action, the California Privacy Protection Agency imposed a $1.1 million fine on youth sports platform PlayOn Sports for alleged violations involving student data and inadequate opt-out mechanisms. The case highlights growing regulatory scrutiny around how companies collect, share, and provide transparency about personal information—especially when schools and students are involved. 

Time 3 Minute Read

SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making. It would amend provisions in the Business and Professions Code and the Code of Civil Procedure to address confidentiality, accuracy, bias, and citation verification for attorneys, and to prohibit delegation of arbitral decision-making to AI while adding disclosure and responsibility requirements for arbitrators.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page