He takes three days off to see his mother, his boss puts a GPS in his car and the courts rule against the company

In modern labor relations, the balance between an employer’s managerial authority and a worker’s fundamental rights has become an increasingly important issue. One of the most contentious points is the use of surveillance technologies, such as geolocation systems (GPS), which allow companies to monitor their employees’ whereabouts during working hours.

Not visiting mom, but finally escaped firing

Workers’ statutes aim to recognize an employer’s right to oversee work activity, although this power is not absolute and must be exercised with respect for the worker’s dignity, privacy, and digital rights. And in Europe, within this framework, the courts have been called to rule on cases where GPS data has been used as the basis for dismissals.

The protagonist of this particular case lives in Venice, and he had taken three hours off under Law 104, which grants time off to care for a family member. He worked in residential security. His employer had installed a GPS tracker in his vehicle to check whether he was indeed using the leave to visit his mother, as allowed under Italy’s Law 104 of 1992. Once it was determined that he had not done so, the company fired him.

However, labor judge Margherita Bortolaso in Venice ruled on the case just a few days ago, recognizing the legitimacy of the employment relationship. The court found that the 46-year-old employee had used the leave in accordance with the law, and that the checks carried out using the satellite system operated by Coop Alleanza 3.0 – based in Bologna – were improper. Instead of going directly to his mother’s home, he went to his own.

However, it was proven that he had taken action to help his mother: he had gone to build a grille for the window of her home to improve security, as the house had been targeted by burglars in recent years.

The decision to immediately terminate the employee – who was regarded as “trustworthy and diligent, never subject to disciplinary action” – was also found to be “reproachable,” according to the Venice court’s ruling. The company was ordered to reinstate the employee immediately and compensate him with all wages owed from the date of dismissal, July 3, 2024, until his return to work. In addition to rehiring the worker, Coop Alleanza 3.0 must also pay $7,560 (converted from €7,000) in legal costs.

How does this compare to the U.S.?

In the United States, similar tensions exist between employer oversight and employee privacy, particularly regarding GPS tracking. While federal law does not explicitly prohibit employers from using GPS to monitor company-owned vehicles, such surveillance must still comply with constitutional and state-level privacy protections. Several states, including California, Connecticut and New York, have enacted laws requiring clear notification and, in some cases, consent before tracking can begin.

Courts have occasionally ruled in favor of employees when tracking was deemed excessive or invasive – especially if it extended into non-working hours or lacked transparency. As in the Venice case, these rulings underscore the principle that surveillance, even when technically legal, must be proportional, respectful, and mindful of workers’ legitimate expectations of privacy.

Get your game on! Whether you’re into NFL touchdowns, NBA buzzer-beaters, world-class soccer goals, or MLB home runs, our app has it all.

Dive into live coverage, expert insights, breaking news, exclusive videos, and more – plus, stay updated on the latest in current affairs and entertainment. Download now for all-access coverage, right at your fingertips – anytime, anywhere.