BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 2, 2012

                     ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
                                Sandre Swanson, Chair
                    AB 1844 (Campos) - As Amended:  April 26, 2012
           
          SUBJECT  :   Employer use of social media.

           SUMMARY  :   Prohibits an employer from requiring an employee or a 
          prospective employee to provide access to his or her personal 
          social media account information.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Prohibits an employer from requiring an employee or 
            prospective employee to disclose a user name or account 
            password for access to a personal social media account that is 
            exclusively used by the employee or prospective employee. 

          2)Defines, for the purpose of this bill, "social media," as any 
            electronic medium where users may create, share, and view 
            user-generated content, including uploading or downloading 
            videos or still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, 
            instant messages or online social networking content. 

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)Limits the information that potential employers and potential 
            housing providers can request form applicants.

          2)Permits employers to hire investigators to examine the 
            criminal history and past civil liabilities of prospective 
            employees.

          3)Permits employers to investigate the credit history of certain 
            specified prospective employees. 

          4)Prohibits employers from limiting an employee's political 
            participation or influencing an employee's political beliefs. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown 

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, privacy laws surrounding 
          social media sites have not been applied to employers in a 
          meaningful fashion.  In fact, as technology has advanced, the 
          federal government and state governments have been slow to 
          modify existing laws that incorporate the new ways that 








                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  2

          individuals communicate information.  For example, the federal 
          Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) protects 
          wire, oral, and electronic communications while those 
          communications are being made, are in transit, and when they are 
          stored on computers.  The ECPA applies to electronic mail 
          (email), telephone conversations, and data stored 
          electronically.  According to the United States Department of 
          Justice (USDOJ), ECPA was significantly amended by the 
          Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) in 
          1994, the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, the USA PATRIOT 
          reauthorization acts in 2006, and the Foreign Intelligence 
          Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008.
          The Stored Communication Act (SCA), which is in Title II of 
          ECPA, makes it unlawful for a person to intentionally access, 
          without authorization, a facility through which an electronic 
          communication service is provided, without valid authorization 
          or to intentionally exceed an authorization to access that 
          facility and thereby obtain, alter, or prevent authorized access 
          to the communication while it is in storage on the system.  
          Unfortunately, federal law has not been amended to address 
          social media sites.

          However, the lack of clear guidance at the federal level has not 
          stopped federal agencies or states from addressing the issue of 
          employee and employer rights as it relates to social media sites 
          and social media activity.  In 2010, for example, the National 
          Labor Relations Board (NLRB), an independent federal agency, 
          investigated complaint that alleged that an ambulance service 
          illegally terminated an employee who posted negative remarks 
          about a supervisor on the employee's personal Facebook page.  
          The complaint also stated that the company maintained and 
          enforced an overly broad blogging and internet posting policy.  
          According to the NLRB, their investigation found that the 
          employee's Facebook posting constituted protected concerted 
          activity and that several provisions of the company's blogging 
          and internet posting policy interfered with the ability of 
          employees to exercise their right to engage in protected 
          concerted activity.  

           Pietrylo v. Hillstone Restaurant Group  

          While the above-mentioned Connecticut case involves the 
          employee's rights to protected speech, it also addresses the 
          limits that federal law places on employers' interference and 
          monitoring of employee's social media use in general.  The issue 








                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  3

          of an employee's right to privacy with regard to his or her 
          social media account password was discussed in the case.  
          According to court documents, the lawsuit was filed by two 
          employees, Mr. Pietrylo and Ms. Marino, after they were fired 
          from their restaurant employer for creating a private MySpace 
          page that allowed employees to vent about their workplace.  
          Since the page was private and could only be joined by 
          invitation, one of the restaurant managers asked a third 
          employee, Ms. St. Jean, for her MySpace password in order to 
          access the private page.  While the employee admitted that she 
          was not threatened, she did state that she felt that she had to 
          give her password to her manager when asked.  The jury 
          ultimately found that the Ms. St. Jean's consent was coerced and 
          ruled in favor of the former employees (Pietrylo and Marino) in 
          June 2009.  The United States Court of Appeals for the Third 
          Circuit affirmed that decision in September 2009.

           Other States

           In Maryland, House Bill 964 (HB 964), introduced February 10, 
          2012, would prohibit an employer from requesting or requiring 
          that an employee or applicant disclose any user name, password 
          or other means for accessing personal account or service through 
          certain electronic communication devises.  HB 964 would also 
          prohibit an employer from taking or threatening to take certain 
          discipline actions for an employee's refusal to disclose certain 
          password and related information.  Finally, the bill would 
          prohibit an employer from failing or refusing to hire an 
          applicant that refuses to disclose his or her password and other 
          related information. HB 964 is currently being considered on the 
          floor of the state's House.

          The State of Illinois is also considering legislation to address 
          the issue of password privacy. Senate Bill 434 (SB 434), 
          introduced February 2, 2012, would prohibit postsecondary 
          education institutions from requiring a student or applicant for 
          admission to disclose any user name, account name, password or 
          other means for accessing certain accounts or services through 
          an electronic communications device.  SB 434 would also prohibit 
          postsecondary education institutions from taking or threatening 
          to take disciplinary actions against a student or applicant who 
          refuses to disclose this information.  Finally, SB 434 specifies 
          that the law would not prohibit a student or applicant from 
          voluntarily disclosing his or her user name, password, or other 
          means for accessing their accounts or services through an 








                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  4

          electronic communications device. 

           FACEBOOK PRIVACY STATEMENT
           
          In a statement issued on March 23, 2012, Facebook's Chief 
          Privacy Officer (CPO) wrote that the company had seen a 
          distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking 
          to gain inappropriate access to user's Facebook profiles.  
          Facebook's CPO stated that the practice undermines the privacy 
          expectations and the security of both the Facebook user and the 
          user's friends and potentially exposes employers who seek this 
          access to unanticipated legal liability.  The CPO cautions users 
          and notes that they should not be forced to share their private 
          information and communications in order to gain employment.  
          Facebook's CPO also cautions employers against potential claims 
          of discrimination or liability for failing to protect employee's 
          information.  

           RELATED LEGISLATION

           SB 1349 (Yee) of 2012 would create the Social Media Privacy Act 
          to establish prohibitions on the ability to require the 
          disclosure of information on personal social media accounts. 
          Specifically, SB 1349 would prohibit a public or private 
          postsecondary educational institution or a public or private 
          employer from requiring, or from formally requesting in writing, 
          a student or employee (or prospective student or employee) to 
          disclose the user name or account password for a personal social 
          media account.  SB 1349 would also define "social media" as an 
          electronic medium where users may create, share, and view 
          user-generated content including videos, photographs, blogs, 
          video blogs, podcasts, instant messages, or web site profiles or 
          locations. 
          SB 1349 recently passed out of the Senate Industrial Relations 
          Committee.

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
           
          In a letter expressing support for this bill, the California 
          Teamsters Public Affairs Council writes that what people do in 
          their personal lives, including what they say on their social 
          media accounts, should be confidential and not something that 
          employers should be monitoring or approving as a condition of 
          obtaining employment.  Writing in support of this bill, the 
          Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) states that an employer gains 








                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  5

          full access to an employee's account when the employer requires 
          the employee to disclose his or her account information.  PRC 
          states that the effect is no different than an employer reading 
          a personal diary and personal emails or viewing personal home 
          videos.  In their letter of support, the State Building and 
          Construction Trade Council of California states that social 
          media websites are the next frontier in "personal space" and the 
          next progression in interpersonal relationships and therefore 
          should be viewed as being no different than previous 
          generation's personal correspondence, photo albums and address 
          books.

            




           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 
          (AFSCME)
          California Association for Health Services at Home
          California Conference Board of Amalgamated Transit Union
          California Conference of Machinists
          California Employment Lawyers
          California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
          California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
          Consumer Action
          Engineers & Scientists of California, IFPTE Local 20
          International Longshore and Warehouse Union
          Jockeys' Guild
          Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
          Professional & Technical Engineers, IFPTE Local 21
          South Bay Labor Council
          State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
          United Food & Commercial Workers Western States Council
          UNITE-HERE
          Utility Workers Union of America Local 132

          Opposition 
           
          None on file









                                                                  AB 1844
                                                                  Page  6

           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Shannon McKinley / L. & E. / (916) 
          319-2091