Bill Overview
Title: Professional Images Protection Act
Description: This bill restricts an employer from recording or using an image of an employee (e.g., photographs or video recordings) without the employee's consent.
Sponsors: Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-12]
Target Audience
Population: Employees worldwide who could have their images used by employers
Estimated Size: 160000000
- The bill affects employees who work for employers that might use their images for corporate purposes, advertising, or any form of data collection involving visual representation.
- In nearly every industry, from retail to tech, employees could be recorded as part of work processes, corporate marketing, or surveillance.
- Globally, the workforce is extensive, reaching into billions, as industries across all sectors employ individuals whose images could be used or recorded as part of their employment process.
- The bill protects employees' rights regarding personal data and image recording, a concern growing with the advance of technology and AI.
Reasoning
- The target population in the US is estimated to be about 160 million people. To simulate 10 individuals from this pool, we need to consider various demographics such as age, gender, and occupation, which cover the different ways people might interact with image recording in the workplace.
- We aim to include people both heavily affected by policy changes and those who might be indirectly impacted or not affected at all, ensuring a range of perspectives from various industries.
- The budget constraints suggest that, even over 10 years, the policy must be efficiently implemented to reach this extensive group, focusing on high-impact sectors first, like tech and retail, where image usage is frequent.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the policy as it provides me more control over how my image is used.
- In tech, our images can often be shared internationally without our knowledge.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retail Store Manager (Dallas, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill will make sure my privacy is respected at work, especially with all the surveillance cameras around.
- I feel more secure knowing my image won't be used without consent.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Corporate Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with recent compliance trends I advise on.
- I doubt it will affect my daily life much, but it's an important step legally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Marketing Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a great initiative. I've had my work image used for promotional purposes without consent too many times.
- It builds trust and makes me feel seen as an individual.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Barista (Seattle, WA)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm indifferent; I've never felt my privacy was invaded, but it's nice to know there's protection.
- The policy won't change much for me immediately.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Healthcare Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Previously, I worried about patient privacy. Now, I feel secure my own privacy is respected.
- It shows a positive step towards ethical practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't impact me at all, but I understand its importance for other industries.
- I find technological aspects elsewhere more concerning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
University Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Consenting to image use in educational settings ensures respects for educators and students alike.
- I have mixed feelings about the administrative burden it might add.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Construction Worker (Denver, CO)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety cameras are crucial, but the policy gives peace knowing images won't be misused.
- It won't change daily work conditions much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as beneficial for my grandchildren entering the workforce.
- No direct impact on my current life, but I support younger generations' rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1200000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 2: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 3: $900000000 (Low: $700000000, High: $1100000000)
Year 5: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential need for international coordination if policy affects multinational corporations.
- Impact on small businesses, which might struggle more with compliance costs compared to larger corporations.
- Balancing employee privacy rights with employer operational needs.