A 2018 Resolution for Legal Departments: Ensure Wellness Apps Meet Privacy Standards
As employees focus on health-related New Year's resolutions, it may be high time for legal departments to focus on a resolution of their own: giving wellness apps a checkup.
January 10, 2018 at 05:24 PM
5 minute read
With the start of 2018, workers across the United States are revitalizing efforts to lead healthier lives. For some, that means diving into employer-sponsored wellness programs, many of which utilize apps. But there's still serious, growing concern that workplace wellness apps could violate privacy rules around users' health data— a risk that in-house teams can help mitigate.
Wellness programs became popular under the Affordable Care Act, which allowed employers to offer seriously discounted health insurance premiums to workers who participated. The data collected varies depending on the app used, but it ranges from vital signs, to hours of sleep, to step counts. Many wellness apps and programs also require a health questionnaire to sign up, one that asks employees for information they may not otherwise share.
An app that monitors the details of an employee's health may sound creepy—but what's more alarming is where this data can end up.
“A lot of the data in the apps or programs can be sold to third parties [whose identities] don't have to be disclosed by the wellness program vendor or the app,” said Dr. Ifeoma Ajunwa, an assistant professor at Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations and a faculty associate member of Cornell Law School.
These third parties include drug developers and others in the health industry, and can lead to targeted, unsolicited ads. The data could also wind up in employer's hands, and while it's theoretically aggregated and anonymous, some apps make it easier for employers to identify the user by breaking employees down into small groups.
Employers can't legally fire someone for health information they uncover from wellness plans, but if they do, it's often hard to prove, according to Ajunwa.
“The problem right now is that there are no set government standards to anonymize data,” she said. “So companies will say the data is anonymized, its disaggregated, but how did they do that? Because there are many different ways to do that, some of which are more effective.”
If employees are concerned (or employers, many of whom may not know the extent to which data is being sold and shared), in-house legal departments can act as the front line of defense. One of the easiest ways to prevent the sale of employee data is by using legal contracts to stipulate upfront what wellness apps can and can't store or sell, Ajunwa explained. Companies should also have a clear plan for how to manage a breach of employee health information.
“The first thing is actual contractual stipulations with the wellness vendor in regards to how the data will be used and how the data will be secured,” Ajunwa said. “I find that a lot of companies don't necessarily have these conversations and they just assume the wellness vendor is taking all the steps.”
Without a contract and specific stipulations in place, the collection of this data is legal in the United States, so long as the wellness program complies with the ACA. While there's been pushback from proponents of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which prohibits employers from forcing workers to disclose their medical history, wellness program supporters have said there's no obligation for employees to sign up.
But some argue that voluntary wellness programs aren't really voluntary as employers can legally incentivize workers with massively discounted premiums or up health care costs for those who don't participate. There may also be social pressure from colleagues at play.
“When there's an environment, [talking] at the water cooler or sharing on Facebook, it's hard on an employee to not participate,” said Pam Dixon, executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a nonprofit public interest research group that focuses on data privacy. “They may feel compelled to participate in a program in order to maintain a good office working relationship. Companies are going to have to look at their culture and say, do we want a policy about making Facebook pages for our wellness program?”
Proposed legislative changes could also affect employers' and employees' rights regarding wellness plan data. The Preserving Employee Wellness Programs Act would allow wellness programs to ask about employees' family medical history or genetic data, which is currently prohibited under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), while keeping financial incentives for wellness program participation in place.
On the international scale, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, effective in May 2018, will require increased transparency around wellness programs in EU countries, according to Ajunwa. In post-GDPR Europe, she said, it could be harder for a situation to arise in which people don't know whether their data's been sold or kept for years after its initial collection, because data processing will now require “freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous” consent.
So as employees across the company focus on health-related New Year's resolutions, it may be high time for legal departments to focus on a resolution of their own: giving wellness apps a checkup.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEmployers Race to File NLRB Petitions to Gain Upper Hand in Union Organizing
5 minute readTractor Supply Co.'s Stock Takes Hit After Activists Bash Its Embrace of DEI
6 minute readCorporate Boards May Be Underestimating the Talent Challenges Ahead
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250