France’s privacy watchdog, CNIL, has imposed a €32 million ($34.8 million) fine on Amazon France Logistique, the warehouse management business of Amazon in France.

The fine, issued in late December, stemmed from Amazon France Logistique’s implementation of an “excessively intrusive” system to monitor staff performance.

The Wall Street Journal reports that CNIL identified Amazon’s use of scanner data to evaluate employee productivity and downtime. This includes tracking periods of inactivity exceeding 10 minutes.

The authority criticized the system, deeming it excessive and potentially harmful to employee well-being, as it pressured staff to justify each break or interruption.

According to Le Monde, Amazon strongly disagreed with CNIL’s findings, stating, “We strongly disagree with the CNIL’s conclusions, which are factually incorrect.”

The company defended its warehouse management systems, considering them common industry practice that ensures the safety, efficiency, and timely processing of packages in accordance with customer expectations.

CNIL emphasized that Amazon failed to adequately inform employees and visitors about video surveillance, which, according to CNBC, constituted a breach of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a cornerstone of data privacy and security law in the EU, with mandatory guidelines for operating entities.

In response to CNIL’s concerns, Amazon stated that it had deactivated the functionality detecting when a package is processed too quickly.

Furthermore, The Wall Street Journal reports that Amazon extended the threshold for inactivity warnings to 30 minutes from the previous 10 minutes. Further signaling a shift in their approach to monitoring workforce productivity.

The Wall Street Journal explains that CNIL’s decision was rooted in inspections conducted after media reports surfaced about specific practices at Amazon’s warehouses.

The regulator also considered several employee complaints, which contributed to its comprehensive assessment and subsequent ruling against Amazon’s surveillance methods.

The fine imposed on Amazon France Logistique is significant, representing approximately 3% of the company’s turnover, as reported by Le Monde.

The imposed financial penalty underscores CNIL’s gravity in addressing GDPR breaches. This emphasizes the significance of upholding privacy standards in workplace environments.

According to Le Monde, CNIL’s findings exposed that Amazon’s employees were under constant surveillance with every action. This includes breaks, which were meticulously recorded and scrutinized.

This extensive monitoring fostered an environment where employees felt compelled to consistently justify their actions.

Le Monde reports extensive surveillance at Amazon France Logistique, including monitoring the time between employees’ entry into the warehouse and the start of their work. Employees were insufficiently informed about the surveillance, and data was retained for 31 days.

Scanners tracked the handling of packages and parcels “right up to the second,” as per the CNIL statement. Additionally, a method called the “stow machine gun” was used to flag articles scanned “too fast” or in less than 1.25 seconds.

Amazon defends its practices by asserting that such surveillance is necessary for safety and efficiency.

According to CNBC, the company stated, “Warehouse management systems are industry standard and are necessary for ensuring the safety, quality, and efficiency of operations and to track the storage of inventory and processing of packages on time and in line with customer expectations.”

As explained by Le Monde, Amazon has retained the right to appeal the decision, with a two-month window to initiate the process.

This period will be crucial for the company to determine whether to challenge CNIL’s ruling or make further adjustments to align its practices with GDPR standards.

CNIL’s decision to fine Amazon France Logistique has significant implications, impacting several thousand employees.

The outcome of this case could set a vital precedent for protecting employee privacy in the digital age.