Thursday, February 26, 2009
12:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. EST
Playback: Monday, March 2, 3:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. EST

Erin Kuzz

Employer Counsel
Sherrard Kuzz

Simon Renouf

Union Counsel
Simon Renouf Professional Corporation

Ian Fellows

Union Counsel
Green & Chercover

Dave Iverson

Director
Forensic Advisory Services
PricewaterhouseCoopers

Lorene Novakowski

Employer Counsel
Fasken Martineau DuMoulin

ISSUES:

Employee monitoring, within and outside the workplace, is a hotly contested issue among workplace parties, given the emerging right to privacy and the introduction of new technologies capable of monitoring an increasing variety of workplace activities. Lancaster House brings together a panel of experts to examine the law governing the collection and use of both traditional and novel types of surveillance evidence by employers, as well as the admissibility of this evidence at arbitration. The panel will focus on the latest developments, including:

• In what circumstances will arbitrators uphold the overt use of video cameras, biometrics or computer technology in the workplace? To monitor employee productivity? Ensure safety? Or counteract security breaches such as theft? Does it make a difference if the information is not recorded, or if it is stored in a protected system (e.g., database, physical cabinet, etc.)? What if it is converted to a format that precludes identification of the employee or his/her information?
• When is covert or surreptitious video surveillance, inside or outside the workplace, permissible? Are reasonable grounds required? Does it make a difference if less invasive options are available? Or if the surveillance is conducted in a public place? When can employers rely at arbitration on surveillance evidence conducted by third parties, such as the workers' compensation board?
• What elements should be set out in a company's policies regarding employee use of computers and other electronic devices? What information should be provided to employees concerning the scope of monitoring and surveillance? Is consent required? And if so, how can it best be obtained?
• Which is the test preferred by arbitrators in deciding whether to admit video surveillance evidence: the "relevance" test or the "reasonableness" test?
• What impact do privacy laws and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms have on the admissibility at arbitration of surveillance evidence, such as video and audio recordings, the employee's hard drive, log files stored on a third party's server and biometrics? In those provinces without a statutory prohibition of invasion of privacy, do arbitrators recognize a "common law right to privacy?" Or a right to privacy based on an implied limit on the exercise of management rights under the collective agreement?
• Can damages be obtained for a "breach of privacy" at arbitration or in the courts? What factors do arbitrators and courts look at to determine if a person's privacy has been violated? In what circumstances have arbitrators and the courts awarded employees damages for privacy violations?

$195, plus GST (Registrations must be paid in advance of the audio conference). Registration costs are per listening site/telephone, so you can have any number of people listening at your location for one low price. Click here for registration information.