Employers in Maine that monitor workers through computers, phones and other devices will soon face new requirements.
Signed into law earlier this month and taking effect 90 days after the current legislative session ends, LD 61 will prohibit employers from using employer surveillance unless they:
- Notify employees beforehand;
- Refrain from using audiovisual monitoring in an employee’s residence, personal vehicle or property unless the monitoring is required by the employee’s job duties;
- Inform prospective employees during the employment interview process that the employer engages in employer surveillance;
- Provide written notice at least once per calendar year to all current employees that the employer engages in employer surveillance; and
- Allow employees to decline requests to install data-collection or -transmission applications on their personal electronic devices for surveillance purposes.
The law defines employer surveillance as “the monitoring of an employee by an employer through the use of an electronic device or system, including but not limited to the use of a computer, telephone, wire or radio or an electromagnetic, photoelectronic or photo- optical system.” Excluded from this definition are surveillance cameras for security or safety purposes and the use of global positioning system (GPS) tracking or other safety devices on employer-provided vehicles.
Employers that violate the new law will be subject to fines of $100-$500 for each violation.
“The use of surveillance technology for safety reasons is one thing,” said the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Amy Roeder. “But employers using this technology to monitor productivity and track the performance of their employees is an overreach. I am proud that the Legislature agrees that we need these common-sense protections in place for Maine workers, especially during this time when monitoring technology is pervasive and intrusive.”
Business groups oppose the new law. “While we understand and support the goal of protecting employee privacy, LD 61 would significantly interfere with employers’ ability to manage their operations effectively and ensure compliance with company policies and state law,” a coalition of business associations and employers wrote last summer, after the bill was passed. “The bill introduces overly prescriptive requirements regarding employer surveillance that threaten to disrupt existing business operations, limit necessary oversight, and compromise workplace accountability.”
For example, they said, the employee-notification requirement risks undermining the effectiveness of internal investigations and could alert individuals under scrutiny.
Maine joins other states including California, Connecticut, Delaware and New York that also have instituted employee-surveillance laws in recent years.
