Nebraska Workplace Privacy Bill Needs Work, Bill Sponsor Admits
While the intent of a proposed workplace privacy bill in the Nebraska legislature was to ensure that employers don't violate employee privacy, more research is needed to ensure the benefits of artificial intelligence or workplace apps aren't stifled in the regulatory process, said bill sponsor Sen. John Frederickson (R) at a hearing on the bill in front of the Business and Labor Committee Monday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
LB-477 aims to amend the Workplace Privacy Act to limit employee tracking except when the governor declares a state of emergency and establishes guidance on how that kind of data is used and stored.
“Since I introduced this bill, several organizations have reached out with information about how they use apps to track job-specific data, have employees clock in for their shift, and even service providers using apps to log notes for home visits,” said Frederickson. “Clearly, the use of artificial intelligence in the workplace is beyond what even I realized before I brought this bill. While it is not my intention to stifle the many uses of this important technology, clearly we need to take a deeper look at how it is being used and what parameters need to be set to ensure that we are protecting workers' privacy."
Frederickson said his bill isn't ready to move forward but pledged to work with the committee and opponents. “Since I've introduced the bill, I've heard from a number of folks,” including the trucking industry, “that have helped educate me on different ways that they are using AI and some potential unintended consequences” of my proposed bill, he said. “Where the bill is currently, I don't think it's ready for prime time. It needs some work. It needs some amendments, but we'll continue to have the conversation and sort of where to figure out where to go next.”
Two people testified in support of the bill, including Brandon Brown, vice president of the state’s Association of Public Employees. “We do not believe employees should be tracked by an app on their cell phones,” he said. “We certainly understand an employer's desire to track their property and their equipment… but we do not think a person should be tracked by an app on their cell phone as a condition of their employment.”
Three people opposed the bill for safety and other reasons. “There are many, many very important reasons why employers need to know the locations of their employees,” said Ryan MacIntosh, lobbyist for the National Federation of Independent Business. “While this purports to exempt tracking of employer property, this exemption does little to make the law workable.”