CIPP-E Exam Dumps | SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: Building Block Inc. is a multinational

<< Prev Question Next Question >>

Question 31/131

SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Building Block Inc. is a multinational company, headquartered in Chicago with offices throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe (including Germany, Italy, France and Portugal). Last year the company was the victim of a phishing attack that resulted in a significant data breach. The executive board, in coordination with the general manager, their Privacy Office and the Information Security team, resolved to adopt additional security measures. These included training awareness programs, a cybersecurity audit, and use of a new software tool called SecurityScan, which scans employees' computers to see if they have software that is no longer being supported by a vendor and therefore not getting security updates. However, this software also provides other features, including the monitoring of employees' computers.
Since these measures would potentially impact employees, Building Block's Privacy Office decided to issue a general notice to all employees indicating that the company will implement a series of initiatives to enhance information security and prevent future data breaches.
After the implementation of these measures, server performance decreased. The general manager instructed the Security team on how to use SecurityScan to monitor employees' computers activity and their location. During these activities, the Information Security team discovered that one employee from Italy was daily connecting to a video library of movies, and another one from Germany worked remotely without authorization. The Security team reported these incidents to the Privacy Office and the general manager. In their report, the team concluded that the employee from Italy was the reason why the server performance decreased.
Due to the seriousness of these infringements, the company decided to apply disciplinary measures to both employees, since the security and privacy policy of the company prohibited employees from installing software on the company's computers, and from working remotely without authorization.
What would be the MOST APPROPRIATE way for Building Block to handle the situation with the employee from Italy?

A. Since the GDPR does not apply to this situation, the company would be entitled to apply any disciplinary measure authorized under Italian labor law.

B. Since the employee was the cause of a serious risk for the server performance and their data, the company would be entitled to apply disciplinary measures to this employee, including fair dismissal.

C. Since the employee was not informed that the security measures would be used for other purposes such as monitoring, the company could face difficulties in applying any disciplinary measures to this employee.

D. Since this was a serious infringement, but the employee was not appropriately informed about the consequences the new security measures, the company would be entitled to apply some disciplinary measures, but not dismissal.

Correct Answer: C

According to the GDPR, the processing of personal data obtained through monitoring software must be lawful, fair, and transparent. This means that the employer must inform the employees about the nature, extent, and reasons for monitoring, and the possible consequences of non-compliance with the company's policies. The employer must also have a legitimate interest or another lawful basis for processing the employees' data, and respect their rights and freedoms. The employer must also comply with the national laws and guidelines of each member state where it operates, which may impose additional conditions or limitations on employee monitoring. In this case, Building Block did not inform the employee from Italy that the security software would also monitor his computer activity and location, and did not specify the purpose and scope of such monitoring. Therefore, the employee could not reasonably expect that his personal data would be processed in this way, and could not exercise his rights under the GDPR, such as the right to access, rectify, or object to the processing. Moreover, the employer did not conduct a proper assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the monitoring, and did not consider less intrusive alternatives to achieve its security goals. Therefore, the employer could face legal challenges from the employee, the Italian supervisory authority, or the labor courts, if it decides to apply disciplinary measures based on the data obtained through the monitoring software. The employer could also face fines or sanctions for violating the GDPR and the Italian data protection law. Reference: GDPR requirements for employee monitoring: rules to follow, Can Your Organisation Monitor Employees' Personal Communications?, ICO publishes guidance to ensure lawful monitoring in the workplace, [Guidelines on processing personal data in the context of connected vehicles and mobility related applications]

Question 31/131

LEAVE A REPLY

Download PDF File