Privacy Issues in the Workplace

25 5 U.S.C. § 552, subd. (a). 26 National Aeronautics and Space Admininistration v. Nelson (2011) 562 U.S. 134 [131 S.Ct. 746, 762]. 27 National Aeronautics and Space Admininistration v. Nelson (2011) 562 U.S. 134 [131 S.Ct. 746, 762]. 28 National Aeronautics and Space Admininistration v. Nelson (2011) 562 U.S. 134 [131 S.Ct. 746, 762]. 29 DFEH, Transgender Rights in the Workplace (November 2017), https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/32/2017/11/DFEH_E04P-ENG-2017Nov.pdf. 30 DFEH, Transgender Rights in the Workplace (November 2017), https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/32/2017/11/DFEH_E04P-ENG-2017Nov.pdf. 31 DFEH, Transgender Rights in the Workplace (November 2017), https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/32/2017/11/DFEH_E04P-ENG-2017Nov.pdf. 32 See Moreno v. Hanford Sentinel, Inc. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1125 [91 Cal.Rptr.3d 858], as mod., where California Court of Appeal held that an article posted on MySpace.com was not private and could be republished without the author’s permission. 33 Assem. Bill No.1844 (2011-2012 Reg.Sess.), to add Section 980 to the California Labor Code, on “Employer Use of Social Media”. 34 Lab. Code, § 1198.5, subd. (h)(2), where statutory provisions permitting an employee to review his or her personnel file do not apply to letters of reference. This statutory language can be construed as creating a reasonable expectation of privacy that the letters of reference will not be disclosed to the employee. 35 Board of Trustees v. Superior Court (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 516 [174 Cal.Rptr. 160]. (Disapproved of by Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 557 fn. 8, where California Supreme Court held that while this and other cases may have been correct to require a compelling interest or compelling need and many of the cases made the correct ultimate conclusion as to whether the information should or should not have been discoverable, this and other cases were disapproved for assuming, without conducting the inquiry Hill requires, that a compelling interest or compelling need was automatically required.). Board of Trustees v. Superior Court (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 516 [174 Cal.Rptr. 160]. (Disapproved of by Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 557 fn. 8, where California Supreme Court held that while this and other cases may have been correct to require a compelling interest or compelling need and many of the cases made the correct ultimate conclusion as to whether the information should or should not have been discoverable, this and other cases were disapproved for assuming, without conducting the inquiry Hill requires, that a compelling interest or compelling need was automatically required.) . 39 Johnson v. Winter (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 435 [179 Cal.Rptr. 585]. 40 Gov. Code, §§ 6250 et seq. 41 Johnson v. Winter (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 435, 438–439 [179 Cal.Rptr. 585, 588] (emphasis supplied) . 42 Comeaux v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co. (9th Cir. 1990) 915 F.2d 1264. 43 Thorne v. City of El Segundo (9th Cir. 1983) 726 F.2d 459, cert. den. (1984) 469 U.S. 979 [105 S.Ct. 380] and appeal after remand (9th Cir. 1986) 802 F.2d 1131, disagreed with (E.D. Mich. 2000) 81 F.Supp.2d 814. 44 15 U.S.C. § 1681-1681u. 45 Civ. Code, §§ 1785.1-1785.6. 46 Griggs v. Duke Power Co . (1971) 401 U.S. 424, 432 [91 S.Ct. 849, 853-854], implied overruling of Griggs’ disparate impact analysis in a statutory context requiring intentional discrimination recognized by (9th Cir. 1996) 914 F.Supp. 1257. 36 15 U.S.C. § 1681g, subd. (a)(2). 37 Civ. Code, § 1786.10, subd. (b). 38

Privacy Issues in the Workplace ©2019 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 178