Employer's Web-Based Evaluations: Are Identities Hidden?
Article:
Employers are finding difficulty in uncovering anonymous online critics. A recent ruling by the Higher Regional Court in Dresden, Germany, clarified the limits for employers seeking the identities of those who anonymously criticize them on employer review platforms.
In the case in question, a user reported their former employer as the "Worst employer of all time" on a platform. The employer demanded the removal of the review, but the platform refused to disclose the critic's identity without evidence of contact. The employer then sued for an injunction, but the court dismissed the claim.
Lawyer Swen Walentowski, a spokesperson for "anwaltauskunft.de," explained that employers have the right to request the deletion of a critical post if there is no record of contact. However, they do not have the authority to demand that a review platform reveal the identity of an anonymous reviewer, as long as the platform can prove there was no contact between the reviewer and the company.
Employers cannot unilaterally force review platforms to reveal the identities of anonymous users without going through legal processes and respecting privacy laws and free speech considerations. If an employer suspects defamation, harassment, or other illegal activity, they must obtain a subpoena or court order compelling a review platform or internet service provider to disclose user information.
Courts often recognize employees' free speech rights, especially when it comes to criticizing employers. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has expressed that online complaints about supervisors, pay, or working conditions can be protected speech. This restricts an employer's ability to seek out anonymous identities without strong legal cause.
Some companies encourage anonymous reporting of workplace misconduct or criticism through hotlines or platforms, emphasizing confidentiality to protect employees from retaliation. This also complicates efforts to identify anonymous commenters.
In summary, employers cannot simply force review platforms to reveal critics' identities. They must pursue legal channels such as subpoenas and demonstrate legitimate legal claims. Even then, courts balance privacy rights, free speech protections, and the relevance of information before ordering disclosure. Improper attempts to uncover identities may violate privacy laws and lead to legal liabilities for the employer.
Source: ntv.de, awi/dpa
- Internet law
- Federal Court of Justice
- Judgments
- Doctors
- In light of the community policy on privacy and free speech, employers should refrain from demanding vocational training programs to disclose the identities of anonymous participants without tangible evidence or legal authorization, especially when the discussions involve criticism about work conditions or colleagues.
- To combat the increasing use of technology in scrutinizing and identifying anonymous critics, some employers have turned to vocational training that focuses on employing ethical and law-abiding methods when navigating the complexities of internet law, particularly in cases involving the disclosure of anonymous individuals' identities.
