Employees of Consolidated Freightways were given the go-ahead by the Supreme Court to pursue their invasion-of-privacy lawsuit regarding hidden cameras in bathrooms.
The Supreme Court refused to hear Consolidated Freightways' appeal of a federal appeals court decision last summer that reinstated a lawsuit by nearly 300 employees against Consolidated Freightways for having surveillance equipment in a restroom.
The trucking company says the cameras were there to stop illegal drug activity at a terminal in Mira Loma, Calif., and that employees had been told they might be videotaped.
Although the surveillance is a crime under California law, lower courts had ruled that the Teamsters contract contained provisions on video surveillance and might be interpreted to narrow employees' privacy protections at work. The only recourse for employees under that ruling was to file union grievances. That's because federal law bars unionized workers from suing for damages over disputes that require interpretation of their contracts.
"Whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy turns on whether he consented to the intrusion," CF's lawyers wrote in their Supreme Court appeal request.
The surveillance was discovered in 1997, when a mirror fell when an employee tried to straighten it. Behind the mirror was a camera. Other cameras and microphones were discovered in other bathrooms at the terminal.
The Supreme Court refused to hear Consolidated Freightways' appeal of a federal appeals court decision last summer that reinstated a lawsuit by nearly 300 employees against Consolidated Freightways for having surveillance equipment in a restroom.
The trucking company says the cameras were there to stop illegal drug activity at a terminal in Mira Loma, Calif., and that employees had been told they might be videotaped.
Although the surveillance is a crime under California law, lower courts had ruled that the Teamsters contract contained provisions on video surveillance and might be interpreted to narrow employees' privacy protections at work. The only recourse for employees under that ruling was to file union grievances. That's because federal law bars unionized workers from suing for damages over disputes that require interpretation of their contracts.
"Whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy turns on whether he consented to the intrusion," CF's lawyers wrote in their Supreme Court appeal request.
The surveillance was discovered in 1997, when a mirror fell when an employee tried to straighten it. Behind the mirror was a camera. Other cameras and microphones were discovered in other bathrooms at the terminal.
media brand
0 Comments
See all comments