31.05.2021 10:37
For a relatively long time, the Office for the Protection of Personal Data and the State Labor Inspection Office have discussed which of the two authorities will oversee the fulfillment of duties pursuant to the provisions of Section 316 of the Labor Code in the context of the exercise of public-law control, given that these provisions govern monitoring of employees at the workplace and the oversight over the use of the employer’s means of work. This debate eventually translated itself into a specific legislative solution.
The Act No. 206/2017 Coll., amending Act No. 251/2005 Coll., On Labor Inspection, which came into effect as of 29 July 2017, has introduced a new form of an administrative infringement for the employer of a natural person (Section 11a), as well as for the employer of a legal person and of self-employed individuals (Section 24a). Such an administrative infringement is committed by an employer who violates the privacy of the employee at a workplace and in the common areas of the place of work by monitoring / checking within the meaning of Section 316 (2) of the Labor Code (overt or covert monitoring, interception, recording of telephone calls, etc.), or who, within the meaning of Section 316 (3) of the Labor Code, fails to properly inform the employee of the scope of the inspection and the means of its implementation. When such and infringement is committed, a fine of up to CZK 1,000,000 may be imposed by the Labor Inspection Office.
In addition and in accordance with the Labor Inspection Act, an employer who requires information from the employee in violation of Section 316 (4) of the Labor Code (indication of sexual orientation, origin, etc.) also commits an administrative infringement carrying a maximum fine of 100,000 CZK.
These new administrative infringements, and hence the de facto new competence of labor inspectorates, do not in any way preclude the right of the Office for Personal Data Protection to exercise its competences, including administrative sanctions, in the given area, in accordance with the provisions on the protection of personal data. In other words, the operation of a camera system recording the workplace in order to, among other, control employees and thus interfere with their privacy, will be subject to administrative supervision of both labor inspectorates and the Office for Personal Data Protection.
Author: Jakub Morávek