Fingerprints, voice prints and vein patterns in a person’s palm are three examples of biometrics thatmay be “moving into the consumer mainstream to unlock laptops and smartphones, or as a supplement to passwords at banks, hospitals and libraries,” reports Anne Eisenberg at the New York Times. Of course, these technologies, aimed at increasing security and, to a lesser degree,convenience, raise data privacy concerns and other risks. However effective, convenient, and efficient these technologies may be, companies need to think through carefully their adoption andimplementation, particularly in the workplace.
Below are just a few of the kinds of questions companies should be asking before implementing technologies that involve capturing biometric information. It islikely that suchtechnologies will go mainstream and, if so, spawn new laws regulating the use of biometric information.Thus, companies using such technologies will need to continue to monitor the legal landscape to manage their risks.
Can wecollect this information?In some cases, the answer may be no. For example, in New York, Labor Law Section 201-a prohibits the fingerprinting of employees by private employers, unless required by law. However, according to an opinion letter issued by the State’s Department of Labor on April 22, 2010, a device that measures the geometry of the hand is permissible as long as it does not scan the surface details of the hand and fingers in a manner similar or comparable to a fingerprint. Other states may permit the collection of biometric information provided certain steps are taken. The IllinoisBiometric Information Privacy Act, for instance, prohibits private entitiesfrom obtaining a person’s or customer’s biometric identifier or biometric information unless the person is informed in writing and consents in writing.
If we can collect it, do we have to safeguard it? Regardless of whether a statute requires a business to safeguard such information, we believe it is good practice to do so.However, states such as Illinois (see above) already require a reasonable standard of care when storing, transmitting or disclosing biometric information.
Is there a notification obligation if unauthorized persons get access to biometric information?In some states the answer is yes. The breach notification statutes in states such as Michigan include biometric data in the definition of personal information. MCLS § 445.72.
Are there any requirements for disposing of this information?Yes, a number of states (e.g., Colorado and Massachusetts) require that certain entities meet minimum standards for properly disposing records containing biometric information.
Can employees claim this technology amounts to some form of discrimination? In addition to securing devices and accounts, biometric technologies also are being used to track employee time and attendance in order to enhance workforce management. These different applications can form the basis of discrimination claims. For example, earlier in 2013, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claimed an employer’s use of a biometric hand scanner to track employee time and attendance violated federallaw by failing to accommodate certain religious beliefs which opposed the use of such devices.
Retinal scan technology is another biometric technology that can be used foridentification/security purposes. However, as explained in arecent Biometric.com article,“examining the eyes using retinal scanning can aid in diagnosing chronic health conditions such as congestive heart failure and atherosclerosis…[as well as] diseases such as AIDS, syphilis, malaria, chicken pox andLyme disease [and] hereditary diseases, such as leukemia, lymphoma, and sickle cell anemia.” Thus, the data captured by such scans can inform employers about the health conditions of their employees, raising a range of medical privacy, medical inquiry and discrimination issues under federal and state laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act.