New England Biz Law Update
A new lawsuit against Apple Inc. highlights tensions between workplace monitoring technologies and employee privacy rights. The case could set the stage for an influential ruling on the limits of employee surveillance in the digital age.
Filed under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), the lawsuit alleges Apple maintains overly restrictive workplace policies that violate employee privacy and labor rights through extensive digital monitoring and speech restrictions.
The surveillance scope
According to the complaint, Apple requires employees to either use company-issued devices or open up their personal devices to company management software. When employees link personal iCloud accounts to these managed devices, Apple claims broad access rights to search personal data, including emails, photos, and other private information.
“If you use your personal account on an Apple-managed or Apple-owned iPhone, iPad or computer, any data stored on the device (including emails, photos, video, notes and more), are subject to search by Apple,” the company’s policy states, according to court documents.
Apple’s policy further requires that the company know the location of every Apple-owned or Apple-managed device at all times, the complaint states. As Apple allegedly requires employees to be reachable for work with access to Apple’s network while off duty, and this requires an Apple device, this means Apple may always know where an employee is located.
Speech restrictions
Beyond privacy concerns, the lawsuit alleges Apple maintains policies that illegally restrict employees from discussing compensation and working conditions. The plaintiff, Amar Bhakta, claims he was forced to remove work-related information from his LinkedIn profile, limiting his professional opportunities.
Allegedly, Apple’s policies limit an employee’s ability to speak about their job responsibilities, accomplishments, and professional growth. The complaint further alleges that employees are constrained from talking to others about potential problems at work, including harassment or unfair treatment.
Apple has reportedly disputed the allegations, stating through a spokesperson that employees have the right to discuss wages and working conditions, and that these rights are covered in annual training.
Broader implications for workplace monitoring
Legal analysts say this case could have implications for workplace surveillance practices, particularly as remote work arrangements blur the lines between personal and professional device use.
The lawsuit raises questions about the balance between legitimate business interests and employee privacy rights. As more companies adopt BYOD policies and monitoring software, courts may step in to establish clearer boundaries around acceptable surveillance practices.
Risks under California labor law
California’s PAGA allows employees to sue their employers on behalf of the state for labor code violations. As the complainant, Bhakta stands to receive a portion of any penalties levied against Apple. This “private attorney general” mechanism incentivizes individual employees to enforce labor laws when state agencies lack the resources to pursue all violations.
Under PAGA, employers can face penalties of up to $100 per affected employee per pay period for initial violations and $200 per employee for subsequent violations. Given Apple’s large California workforce, potential penalties could be substantial.
Apple under scrutiny
The legal challenge comes amid broader scrutiny of Apple’s employment practices. Notably, the firm representing Bhakta is also handling a separate equal pay lawsuit against Apple. That case alleges the company systematically underpays women in its engineering, marketing, and AppleCare divisions in California.
These parallel cases could strengthen arguments that Apple’s restrictive communication policies may be enabling other workplace violations by limiting employees’ ability to identify and address equity issues.
