2.3 Countervailing Interests: Rights of Workers
Since 1970 Italy has enacted stringent rules on surveillance of workers while at
work. At that time the main concern was video-surveillance in factories and offices.
Digital equipment was unknown. The Article 4 of the “Statuto dei lavoratori”
12
states that such a form of remote control can be introduced only for organizational
reasons, and to protect safety of workers and of working premises. Such devices can
be introduced after negotiation with the trade unions.
It is clear that such a regulation makes little sense in a digitalized context, in
which workers are constantly connected with their employer’s platform on which
they perform many of their tasks.
The Garante attempted to discipline the processing of sensitive data (i.e. data
which require a specific written authorization by the interested person) through
specific guidelines issued in 2006 and still in force.
13
However, the most controversial area has been, and still is, that of the use of data
stored by the employer as evidence of the workers violation or his or her duties, such
as to justify the termination of contract.
The main elements one can extract from the rich case law are related to the right
for the employer to inspect the e-mails sent or received by the employee on the firm’s
e-mail account (in favour Cassazione 23 February 2012, n. 2722
14 ).
Such activity of data processing has been considered lawful when put into place
by the employer for the protection in court of rights which have been challenged
(Cassazione 11 July 2013, n. 17204
15 ).
2.4 Countervailing Interests: Media Reporting
The main area of conflict that has arisen over the last 20 years is between data
protection—mostly seen in its privacy aspect—and journalist activity.
The Garante, already in 1998, attempted to immunize the press from the application of data protection laws, especially under the requirement of consent of the
interested person. This brought to a Code of self-regulation which actually has a
binding nature, but in only one direction, in the sense that it is generally applied to
12 Law 20 May 1970, n. 300.
13 Deliberazione n.53 del 23 novembre 2006 “Line e guida in materia di trattamento di dati personali
di lavoratori per finalità di gestione del rapporto di lavoro alle dipendenze di datori di lavoro privati”
(available at www.garanteprivacy.it/web/guest/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/1364939).
14 Published in Foro italiano (2012) I, c. 1421; and in Rivista italiana di diritto del lavoro (2013)
1, II, p. 113.
15 Published in Diritto e giustizia online 11 July 2013.
Italian National Report: Data Protection in the Internet
247
Since 1970 Italy has enacted stringent rules on surveillance of workers while at
work. At that time the main concern was video-surveillance in factories and offices.
Digital equipment was unknown. The Article 4 of the “Statuto dei lavoratori”
12
states that such a form of remote control can be introduced only for organizational
reasons, and to protect safety of workers and of working premises. Such devices can
be introduced after negotiation with the trade unions.
It is clear that such a regulation makes little sense in a digitalized context, in
which workers are constantly connected with their employer’s platform on which
they perform many of their tasks.
The Garante attempted to discipline the processing of sensitive data (i.e. data
which require a specific written authorization by the interested person) through
specific guidelines issued in 2006 and still in force.
13
However, the most controversial area has been, and still is, that of the use of data
stored by the employer as evidence of the workers violation or his or her duties, such
as to justify the termination of contract.
The main elements one can extract from the rich case law are related to the right
for the employer to inspect the e-mails sent or received by the employee on the firm’s
e-mail account (in favour Cassazione 23 February 2012, n. 2722
14 ).
Such activity of data processing has been considered lawful when put into place
by the employer for the protection in court of rights which have been challenged
(Cassazione 11 July 2013, n. 17204
15 ).
2.4 Countervailing Interests: Media Reporting
The main area of conflict that has arisen over the last 20 years is between data
protection—mostly seen in its privacy aspect—and journalist activity.
The Garante, already in 1998, attempted to immunize the press from the application of data protection laws, especially under the requirement of consent of the
interested person. This brought to a Code of self-regulation which actually has a
binding nature, but in only one direction, in the sense that it is generally applied to
12 Law 20 May 1970, n. 300.
13 Deliberazione n.53 del 23 novembre 2006 “Line e guida in materia di trattamento di dati personali
di lavoratori per finalità di gestione del rapporto di lavoro alle dipendenze di datori di lavoro privati”
(available at www.garanteprivacy.it/web/guest/home/docweb/-/docweb-display/docweb/1364939).
14 Published in Foro italiano (2012) I, c. 1421; and in Rivista italiana di diritto del lavoro (2013)
1, II, p. 113.
15 Published in Diritto e giustizia online 11 July 2013.
Italian National Report: Data Protection in the Internet
247