It is judged that turning on the web camera for employee monitoring is against privacy and is a violation of human rights

With the spread of remote work, more and more companies are introducing a mechanism to ``monitor employees' work through webcams'', but many people should be uncomfortable with webcam monitoring. In the Netherlands, companies that dismissed employees for ``refusing to monitor webcams'' will be ordered to pay a total of about 75,000 euros (about 10 million yen) as compensation for privacy violations and unfair dismissal. Judgment has been made.

ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2022:5656, Rechtbank Zeeland-West-Brabant, 10072897 AZ VERZ 22-61
https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2022:5656

Dutch employee fired by US firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75,000 in court | NL Times
https://nltimes.nl/2022/10/09/dutch-employee-fired-us-firm-shutting-webcam-awarded-eu75000-court

The trial in question stems from the dismissal of a Dutch employee who worked remotely at US-based software development company Chetu . The dismissed employee had been working at Chetu since January 2019, but was asked to participate in a 'corrective action program' on August 23, 2020. While participating in the program, he enabled screen sharing and used a webcam. was ordered to turn on.

On August 25, 2020, the employee responded to the request to participate in the program, saying, ``It is a violation of privacy and uncomfortable to be monitored by a camera for 9 hours a day. It should be possible to monitor all activity on the laptop.' The next day, the employee was fired for 'refusal to work' and 'disobedient behavior.'

A few weeks after the dismissal of Chetu, an employee said, ``There was no urgent reason to justify the dismissal.'' ``The request to turn on the webcam is unreasonable and violates privacy rules.'' Filed a lawsuit against Chetu. On the other hand, Chetu denied infringement of privacy, claiming that ``monitoring with a webcam in remote work is the same as being monitored by an administrator in the office.'' was doing.

As a result of the lawsuit, the court cited Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights , which stipulates respect for private life, and past precedents that ``strict conditions are imposed when monitoring employees,'' and ``keep the webcam on. The order violates the employee's privacy,' and ruled Chetu that the dismissal was legally void.

The court awarded Chetu ``unpaid salary of 2,700 euros (about 380,000 yen) or more'', ``8,375 euros (about 1,180,000 yen) as compensation for unfair dismissal'', and ``9,500 euros (about 1,340,000 yen) as labor transition support''. In addition to `` 50,000 euros (about 7,070,000 yen) as additional compensation '' and `` about 585 euros (about 80,000 yen) in court costs '', a total of about 75,000 euros (about 1,000 10,000 yen) is ordered.

According to Dutch media NL Times, it is possible to appeal within three months of the judgment in a civil lawsuit in the Netherlands where the judgment exceeds 1750 euros (about 250,000 yen). However, at the time of writing the article, the intention of each other's appeal has not been clarified.