Ontario employers should use a broad definition of the term “employee electronic monitoring” if they don’t want to run afoul of proposed changes to provincial labour law, says a Toronto privacy lawyer.
That, said Daniel Michaluk, is because there isn’t a definition in the proposed act of “electronic monitoring”.
“It will create issues for employers trying to implement this,” predicted Michaluk, a partner in the Borden Ladner Gervais law firm who practices in privacy and cybersecurity law, unless the proposed legislation is amended in committee before being passed.
Section 41.1.1 of the proposed Bill 88 — known as the Working for Workers Act, introduced last week, obliges any employer in the province with more than 25 employees to have a written policy explaining how and in what circumstances the firm electronically monitors employees. The policy also has to state how the data collected is used.
To be safe, Michaluk said employers should assume the term includes data collected from a wide range of technologies: Standard endpoint data, data from endpoint detection and response (EDR) agents, data generated from mobile device management (MDM) applications, company-owned vehicle telematics, and, of course, network behaviour analytics and video surveillance footage. It could even include logging website traffic on a web server, he said.
Note that mobile device management applications could cover not only company-owned devices but also employee-owned devices if...
Ukrainian General Staff spokesperson Andriy Kovalov dismissed Russian military chief Valery Gerasimov's claims of advances toward Kramatorsk and Zaporizhzhia and the capture of several settlements...