Privacy commissioner Frank Work. Biometric scanners “no threat to privacy”
By ANDREW HANON
Alberta’s information watchdog has given the green light for employers to use biometric scanning devices after ruling the technology does not violate individuals’ privacy.
Privacy commissioner Frank Work began probing the issue after two separate complaints from people who had been ordered by their bosses to use the instruments.
In Edmonton, an employee of the Empire Ballroom nightclub at West Edmonton Mall refused a management edict to sign in and out of work by using a biometric thumb scanner, which she complained was highly intrusive. She also claimed she was fired for refusing to do so.
In a similar case in Calgary, an extended care centre employee complained that their privacy was violated when they had to use a biometric hand scanner.
Both investigations determined that the devices do not violate privacy because they do not actually scan or retain thumb or hand prints. Rather, the systems collect measurements of each employees’ print and generates an ID number. The numbers are used to document when employees sign in and out of work.
Empire Ballroom general manager Sergio Maione said there’s “no way” the information in the device can be used for things like identity theft.
Customers don’t come into contact with the device. The nightclub has been using the system for about a year and Maione says it’s “eliminated a lot of paperwork.”
It also prevents employees from signing in other co-workers, he said. “We have 60 employees, and everyone else is OK with it,” he said.
Maione said it’s “absolutely untrue” that the employee was fired over thumb scans, but declined to say why she was terminated because it’s a private matter.

2 responses so far ↓
wil // September 7, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Of course it’s wonderful. People from above always assure us that.
jeanluc // September 8, 2008 at 8:15 pm
“devices do not violate privacy because they do not actually scan or retain thumb or hand prints”
if prints are not retained, against what are the scans measured? Oh right, prints are not scanned…
does this make any sense at all?