The US Supreme Court ruled last month that a warrant is required for police to track a suspect with a GPS device, or the search violates the Fourth Amendment’s protection from unreasonable searches. Many employees use devices (cell phones, smart phones, tablets and laptop computers) that incorporate GPS location monitoring. In light of US v. Jones, the question is: do employees now have additional protections from employer monitoring?
The Jones case occurred in the criminal law context, and does not apply directly to the private employer/employee context. Lawyers will, however, be reading the tea leaves for clues regarding how the Supreme Court might decide a private employer/employee tracking issue. Public employers, such as schools and local government agencies, are bound by the 4th Amendment constitutional parameters against unlawful searches and seizures in the employment setting.
Private employers already must heed federal and state laws directed to specific monitoring activities. Federal law governs monitoring of certain aspects of email activity (such as through the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and Stored Communications Act ). States are increasingly passing laws restricting employer monitoring of employee location, visual surveillance, computer/internet monitoring, telephone monitoring and even microchip implantation.
Please see full article below for more information.
Please see full publication below for more information.
