Get started free →
HR 9402 119th Congress · House

Bill to Curb Workplace Surveillance and Protect Worker Data

Advocate

Official title: To prohibit, or require disclosure of, the surveillance, monitoring, and collection of certain worker data by employers, and for other purposes.

This bill would restrict or require disclosure of employers’ surveillance, monitoring, and collection of certain worker data. It is aimed at protecting employees from intrusive tracking practices while requiring transparency where monitoring is allowed. The measure would mainly affect employers that use digital tools to track productivity, communications, location, or other workplace activity, along with the vendors that supply those systems.

  • Would prohibit or require disclosure of certain employer surveillance and monitoring practices.
  • Targets collection of worker data, including information tied to day-to-day job performance.
  • Would affect employers that use digital monitoring tools and the vendors that provide them.
  • Would require changes to workplace privacy policies and disclosure practices.
Public Relevance 28 / 100
Niche Modest scope Broad

If you are an employee, the bill could limit how much your employer can monitor your activity or require clearer disclosure of workplace tracking. That may mean fewer hidden surveillance practices, more notice about data collection, and stronger protection for sensitive information gathered during work. For employers, it could require policy changes and tighter controls on monitoring software and data use.

See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysis

BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.

Bill
HR 9402
Congress
119th Congress
Official title
To prohibit, or require disclosure of, the surveillance, monitoring, and collection of certain worker data by employers, and for other purposes.
Policy area
Labor & Employment
Latest action
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. (June 23, 2026)
Last updated
June 24, 2026
FOR
  • Workers and labor advocates They argue employees deserve meaningful privacy at work and should not have hidden or excessive surveillance used against them in discipline, scheduling, or performance reviews. Disclosure requirements and limits on monitoring would give workers more control over sensitive data.
  • Remote and gig workers These workers are often monitored by software that tracks activity in ways that feel invasive and difficult to avoid. Supporters say clearer rules would prevent overreach and make surveillance practices more transparent.
  • Privacy advocates They contend workplace data can reveal highly personal information, including behavioral patterns and health-related inferences. Limiting collection and requiring notice would reduce misuse and data-security risks.
AGAINST
  • Employers and human resources managers They may argue that monitoring is necessary to prevent theft, protect customers, measure productivity, and enforce safety rules. Broad limits could make it harder to manage operations and investigate misconduct.
  • Technology vendors selling workforce analytics tools They could say the bill would restrict legitimate business software and create compliance burdens for employers that rely on analytics, AI-driven scheduling, and remote supervision tools. That could slow adoption of workplace technology.
  • Operations-intensive industries such as logistics and call centers These sectors often use monitoring to coordinate large workforces and maintain service standards. Opponents may argue the bill could reduce efficiency and raise administrative costs without clearly improving outcomes.
  • “prohibit, or require disclosure of, the surveillance, monitoring, and collection of certain worker data”

    This signals two possible approaches: some employer tracking would be banned, while other monitoring would still be allowed only if workers are told about it. In practice, that means employers could need to rewrite privacy notices and possibly stop using some tools altogether.

  • “certain worker data”

    The bill focuses on worker-related information rather than all business data. That means the practical effect would center on information tied to employees’ conduct, performance, communications, or presence at work.

  • “by employers”

    The obligations would fall on the workplace side of the relationship, not on employees themselves. Employers would likely need to review policies, contracts, and monitoring technology to avoid unlawful collection or disclosure.

  • “and for other purposes”

    This common legislative phrase leaves room for related enforcement or administrative provisions. In real-world terms, that can mean the bill may also address compliance, definitions, or agency oversight connected to worker privacy.

June 23, 2026

Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Take Action

Get more from BillBoard

Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.

Ask AI about this bill

Data sourced from api.congress.gov.

Free to use · No credit card

Understand every bill.
Make your voice count.

BillBoard turns dense U.S. legislation into plain-English summaries, helps you take a stance, and connects you to your representatives — in seconds.