Chicago Hilton Hotel Facing BIPA Class Action Over Alleged Employee Fingerprint Scanning

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit has been filed in Illinois circuit court by a former DoubleTree by Hilton Chicago housekeeper who claims the hotel violated the state’s biometric privacy law by scanning her fingerprints for timekeeping purposes.

The latest in a series of lawsuits alleging Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) violations, the case claims defendants Hilton Management, LLC and DoubleTree Hotel Systems, LLC fell short of the law’s strict requirements concerning the collection and storage of employees’ biometric data such as fingerprints. In particular, the lawsuit alleges the defendants failed to:

• Inform workers in writing of the purpose and length of time that their biometric information would be collected, stored, and used;
• Post a publicly available retention schedule outlining when the information would be permanently destroyed;
• Obtain a written release from employees to “collect, store, disseminate, or otherwise use” their fingerprints; and
• Obtain workers’ consent to disclose their private biometric information to third parties.

The lawsuit argues that unlike more traditional forms of identification (i.e., ID badges and timecards), biometric data are “unique biometric identifiers” particular to one individual that cannot be replaced or changed if compromised.

“This exposes Defendants’ employees to serious and irreversible privacy risks,” the complaint stresses.

The plaintiff, who allegedly worked at the Chicago hotel for a total of 19 days in July 2019, says she was required to provide her fingerprint data as a condition of employment and had to scan her fingerprints every time she clocked in or out of the defendants’ timekeeping system. She claims she never signed a written release allowing the hotel to collect and store her biometric data, nor was ever informed of how long her fingerprints would be retained, when they would be destroyed, or with whom they would be shared.

The lawsuit is seeking damages of $1,000 per negligent violation, which can be raised to $5,000 if the violations are found to have been intentional or reckless.