New federal power to police workplace surveillance—and workers can sue.
H.R. 9402 — Stop Spying Bosses Act · Filed by Chris Deluzio (D-PA) · 9 cosponsors · Introduced Jun 23, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits employers with 11+ workers from collecting, selling, or transferring worker data without strict limits and worker consent. It requires employers to disclose what data they collect, how they use it, and bans collection for union-busting, political surveillance, health monitoring unrelated to job duties, and off-duty tracking. Workers gain rights to access their data, correct errors, and sue employers for violations, with statutory damages ranging from $500 to $100,000 depending on the violation type.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a comprehensive prohibition on employer data collection and transfer, paired with worker access and correction rights. It establishes a new federal regulator (Worker Protection and Technology Division) to enforce these restrictions and creates a private right of action with statutory damages. The functional character is worker-protective regulation, not a narrow carve-out or subsidy.
What the text implies
- The bill's definition of 'employee data' is extremely broad—including inferred data, online activity, and biometric information—which may create compliance complexity for employers and litigation risk around what counts as 'employee data' in borderline cases.
- The 'least invasive means' and 'strictly necessary' standards in Section 3(3)–(4) are subjective and will likely generate significant litigation over whether specific data collection practices meet the threshold, creating uncertainty for employers and workers alike.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
labor organizations and worker advocacy groups (enforcement partners, advisory board seats); plaintiff employment attorneys (private right of action with fee-shifting); privacy and compliance consulting firms (employer compliance demand)