Latest news with #GeneralDataProtectionRegulations
Business News Wales
15-05-2025
- Business
- Business News Wales
One Third of Employers Think AI will Increase Productivity
More than a third (35%) of employers think that artificial intelligence (AI) will increase productivity, according to a new survey. Workplace expert Acas commissioned YouGov to ask employers in Britain what they thought was the most important benefit of AI at work. The survey also found that: 12% thought AI would give a competitive edge. 11% thought it would increase knowledge. 11% thought more work would be done with fewer staff. 11% thought there would be no benefit. Acas Chief Executive Niall Mackenzie said: 'Our survey shows optimism amongst some employers about the potential for AI to boost their productivity, decrease costs and increase knowledge. 'Used responsibly, AI has the potential to empower workers and support the delivery of different workplace tasks. 'Businesses should be proactive in having early discussions about AI with staff, trade unions, and other worker representatives to understand the potential implications and ensure its adoption is well-informed. A good clear policy will help businesses stay safe, transparent and reassure staff that they are valued.' Some tips for employers from Acas on the use of AI at work include: Employers should develop clear policies regarding the use of AI in the workplace and should consult employees and any representatives on its introduction. If there is an expectation that certain roles begin using AI, that could mean a change of terms and conditions. Employers investing in AI should highlight how it can improve employees' roles and reassure staff that human involvement will still be needed. Organisations should remember that AI is not perfect, so outputs should be checked for accuracy, tone and bias. AI should be cited when used and staff may require training on how to get the best outputs. A company's data privacy policies will apply for the use of AI, and it is wise to check with your IT team for approved platforms. Employees should be careful entering any information that is business sensitive or personal into public tools. Any information that you do enter could be made public or used by others, so check company policies on the use of AI in the workplace and be aware of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).
Engadget
14-05-2025
- Business
- Engadget
Appeals court confirms that tracking-based online advertising is illegal in Europe
The Belgian Court of Appeal ruled today that the Transparency and Consent Framework (TCF) currently used as the foundation for most online advertising is illegal in the EU. This decision upholds the findings of the Belgian Data Protection Authority from 2022 that the technology underpinning online ads violates several principles of the General Data Protection Regulations , an EU digital privacy law that took effect in 2018. Engadget's Daniel Cooper wrote a thorough explainer of the different systems that support the current online advertising ecosystem, which is valuable reading for anybody spending time online. The very simplified version is that advertisers participate in real-time bidding (RTB) to show their content online. Currently, those bids are based on information gathered from tracking individuals' activities online with cookies. The TCF was created by the Interactive Advertising Bureau as a way to standardize how websites ask users for permission to be tracked. The original 2022 decision determined that both the consent collected by the TCF and the data collected in the RTB process were illegal under the GDPR. ADVERTISEMENT Advertisement "Today's court's decision shows that the consent system used by Google, Amazon, X, Microsoft, deceives hundreds of millions of Europeans," said Dr Johnny Ryan, director of Enforce at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, who has been leading the legal charge against the current approach to ad tech. "The tech industry has sought to hide its vast data breach behind sham consent popups. Tech companies turned the GDPR into a daily nuisance rather than a shield for people." The reaction from IAB Europe, which filed the appeal, seems to mostly be relief that it hasn't been found responsible for the data collected by TCF. "The Market Court has rejected the APD's view that IAB Europe is a joint controller together with TCF participants for their own respective processing of personal data, for instance for the purpose of digital advertising," the organization's statement says. IAB Europe notes that it has already suggested changes to the TCF that better reflect the "limited controllership" and submitted them to the Belgian Data Protection Authority. The group faced fines and was ordered to rebuild its current ad-tech framework as a result of the original decision. We've also reached out to some of the major advertisers that use the RTB technology for comment on the ruling. While this does seem like a big win for privacy advocates and internet users in the EU, it's unclear exactly what the next steps will be for advertisers and for ad tech systems. Most likely, regulators will oversee changes the IAB Europe makes to the TCF, so consent pop-ups may not yet be a thing of the past.
Business News Wales
28-04-2025
- Business
- Business News Wales
One in Four Workers Worries that AI Will Lead to Job Losses
More than a quarter (26%) of workers are worried that artificial intelligence (AI) will lead to job losses, according to a new survey. Workplace expert Acas commissioned YouGov to ask employees in Britain what their biggest concerns about the use of AI were. The poll also found that just under a fifth (17%) were worried about AI making errors, while 15% were concerned about a lack of regulation. Acas Interim Chief Executive, Dan Ellis, said: 'Some employers may be looking to embrace new technologies as a way to cut costs, increase productivity or make workers' jobs easier. 'There can be concerns from staff when new technologies are introduced at work and it's clear from our study that their biggest worry is that AI will result in job losses. 'Bosses should have clear policies on the use of AI at work, remember that it is not a perfect technology and have open conversations with employees around its use.' Some tips for employers from Acas on the use of AI at work include: Employers should develop clear policies regarding the use of AI in the workplace and should consult employees and any representatives on its introduction. If there is an expectation that certain roles begin using AI, that could mean a change of terms and conditions. Employers investing in AI should highlight how it can improve employees' roles and reassure staff that human involvement will still be needed. Organisations should remember that AI is not perfect, so outputs should be checked for accuracy, tone and bias. AI should be cited when used and staff may require training on how to get the best outputs. A company's data privacy policies will apply for the use of AI, and it is wise to check with your IT team for approved platforms. Employees should be careful entering any information that is business sensitive or personal into public tools. Any information that you do enter could be made public or used by others, so check company policies on the use of AI in the workplace and be aware of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). Acas is holding a special conference next month with experts that will debate the introduction of AI in workplaces.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘My office is using spyware to make sure I attend two days a week – can I stop them?'
Do you have a legal question to put to Gary? Email askalawyer@ or use the form at the bottom of the page. Dear Gary, I must prefix this query by first saying I enjoy going to my office. The office manager has made the environment great, and all my colleagues are fantastic to work with. However, my employer has started using the building security badge swipes in and out of the building to monitor who is complying with the pretty relaxed two-days-a-week return to office mandate. We can basically choose if we work from home or in the office, but we should be doing at least two days a week in the office. In my opinion, this is a draconian measure. We already work on laptops filled with corporate spyware, so this tracking feels like one more step into working in a panopticon. My legal concern is whether this change breaches the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). The data collected for badge swipes was never intended to be used for attendance. Is this now classed as a disproportionate amount of data to collect? – Mark Dear Mark, I am very glad you enjoy going into your office. I have said before that I am a big fan of office working, rather than home working. But my personal preference does not make something lawful! To have a legally enforceable working environment which requires hybrid working between remote home working and physical office attendance, employers must comply with some basic protocols. First and foremost, the location of your place of work should be specified in your employment contract. And remember, all workers are entitled to a copy of their employment contract including key terms and conditions. You describe a working environment which is a hybrid model where you are permitted to work at home some of the time and be in the actual office premises at other times. In your case, you say the requirement is to be in the office at least two days every week. Your words also indicate this 'mandate' to work from the office at least two days a week is a policy change. In that case, your employer should have gone through a process of reevaluating relevant roles and deciding that they should no longer be fully remote working. I say all this to add context and to allow you to consider if hybrid working itself has been introduced in the appropriate manner. Regarding the particular concern you have about your employer edging you and your colleagues towards working in a 'panopticon', while I enjoy the rich language you used, I think you are being somewhat overdramatic. More to the point, you are losing sight of the fact that your employer is entitled to monitor you at work. Monitoring employees is about ensuring they are adhering to their employment contract and other rules of conduct in the workplace. But it can also be about protecting employees from unsafe working practices and ensuring they are working to their optimal ability. The legal starting point is therefore that employers can monitor employees. The question is if and when that becomes excessive and, therefore, a breach of employee rights. You mention 'spyware' within your IT. Some employers also use CCTV. And now you say data from your staff cards are to be tracked. All of these devices are acceptable if used across the board and not targeting any one individual employee. In 2023, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which is the UK's data regulator charged with overseeing the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) which you mention, issued guidance on employers monitoring workers. Do have a read of it. The ICO guidance says that any tracking must be done in the 'least intrusive' way possible and that workers must be made aware explicitly of the 'nature, extent and reasons for monitoring'. By your own admission, you have been told of what is to happen and why, and what your data will be used for. In your case, the purpose is to ensure you are complying with your employment contract. To be pitch perfect in their approach, your employer should refer to your data protection and privacy rights in the staff handbook for your organisation and explain what data will be collected and how it will be stored. Cases of excessive employee surveillance that contravene workers' privacy rights can result in enforcement action by the ICO, including fines against the employer. But in this case, I do not see what is happening as being excessive. In my view, it is proportionate. It seems to me one problem here is that you say the two days in the office rule is 'pretty relaxed', but to my mind that interpretation is at odds with the conduct of your employer who clearly wishes to ensure it is a rule which is complied with. I think there needs to be transparency on both sides. Your employer needs to be very clear you are all expected to be in the office at least two days a week. It needs to explain that one way of monitoring this will be use of the data harvested from your swipe cards. And as an employee, who enjoys your job and values it, you should be very visibly there at least two days a week. I always find with employees at my law firm that those who get it and fully play by the rules are the ones who are allowed the most flexibility because I am confident that they are fulfilling their side of the employment contract. In that sense, I am more relaxed about how and when they do their role. In other words, be careful not to impose a panopticon on yourself by your own inflexible approach and conduct. Ask a Lawyer should not be taken as formal legal advice, but rather as a starting point for readers to undertake their own further research. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
26-03-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
‘My office is using spyware to make sure I attend two days a week – can I stop them?'
Do you have a legal question to put to Gary? Email askalawyer@ or use the form at the bottom of the page. Dear Gary, I must prefix this query by first saying I enjoy going to my office. The office manager has made the environment great, and all my colleagues are fantastic to work with. However, my employer has started using the building security badge swipes in and out of the building to monitor who is complying with the pretty relaxed two-days-a-week return to office mandate. We can basically choose if we work from home or in the office, but we should be doing at least two days a week in the office. In my opinion, this is a draconian measure. We already work on laptops filled with corporate spyware, so this tracking feels like one more step into working in a panopticon. My legal concern is whether this change breaches the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR). The data collected for badge swipes was never intended to be used for attendance. Is this now classed as a disproportionate amount of data to collect? – Mark Dear Mark, I am very glad you enjoy going into your office. I have said before that I am a big fan of office working, rather than home working. But my personal preference does not make something lawful! To have a legally enforceable working environment which requires hybrid working between remote home working and physical office attendance, employers must comply with some basic protocols. First and foremost, the location of your place of work should be specified in your employment contract. And remember, all workers are entitled to a copy of their employment contract including key terms and conditions. You describe a working environment which is a hybrid model where you are permitted to work at home some of the time and be in the actual office premises at other times. In your case, you say the requirement is to be in the office at least two days every week. Your words also indicate this 'mandate' to work from the office at least two days a week is a policy change. In that case, your employer should have gone through a process of reevaluating relevant roles and deciding that they should no longer be fully remote working. I say all this to add context and to allow you to consider if hybrid working itself has been introduced in the appropriate manner. Regarding the particular concern you have about your employer edging you and your colleagues towards working in a 'panopticon', while I enjoy the rich language you used, I think you are being somewhat overdramatic. More to the point, you are losing sight of the fact that your employer is entitled to monitor you at work. Monitoring employees is about ensuring they are adhering to their employment contract and other rules of conduct in the workplace. But it can also be about protecting employees from unsafe working practices and ensuring they are working to their optimal ability. The legal starting point is therefore that employers can monitor employees. The question is if and when that becomes excessive and, therefore, a breach of employee rights. You mention 'spyware' within your IT. Some employers also use CCTV. And now you say data from your staff cards are to be tracked. All of these devices are acceptable if used across the board and not targeting any one individual employee. In 2023, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which is the UK's data regulator charged with overseeing the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) which you mention, issued guidance on employers monitoring workers. Do have a read of it. The ICO guidance says that any tracking must be done in the 'least intrusive' way possible and that workers must be made aware explicitly of the 'nature, extent and reasons for monitoring'. By your own admission, you have been told of what is to happen and why, and what your data will be used for. In your case, the purpose is to ensure you are complying with your employment contract. To be pitch perfect in their approach, your employer should refer to your data protection and privacy rights in the staff handbook for your organisation and explain what data will be collected and how it will be stored. Cases of excessive employee surveillance that contravene workers' privacy rights can result in enforcement action by the ICO, including fines against the employer. But in this case, I do not see what is happening as being excessive. In my view, it is proportionate. It seems to me one problem here is that you say the two days in the office rule is 'pretty relaxed', but to my mind that interpretation is at odds with the conduct of your employer who clearly wishes to ensure it is a rule which is complied with. I think there needs to be transparency on both sides. Your employer needs to be very clear you are all expected to be in the office at least two days a week. It needs to explain that one way of monitoring this will be use of the data harvested from your swipe cards. And as an employee, who enjoys your job and values it, you should be very visibly there at least two days a week. I always find with employees at my law firm that those who get it and fully play by the rules are the ones who are allowed the most flexibility because I am confident that they are fulfilling their side of the employment contract. In that sense, I am more relaxed about how and when they do their role. In other words, be careful not to impose a panopticon on yourself by your own inflexible approach and conduct.
