Coercion was never a factor in the law. Even if you wanted your fingerprints taken, you can still sue them for taking it without consent. It is a restriction put into place to enforce a practice.
Another example would be medicine, even if you took medicine knowing possible side effects, the maker of the medicine is still culpable if they don't follow FDA rules.
You can't say consent was implied when the law is telling you a definition of what viable consent is in a specific way. You can't just ignore the law and make excuses or blame the employees. On their part, they only have to prove that fingerprints were taken and consent was not. If you are they can just quit, then the entire point of the law is sl they won't have to and instead punish the company.
Another example would be medicine, even if you took medicine knowing possible side effects, the maker of the medicine is still culpable if they don't follow FDA rules.
You can't say consent was implied when the law is telling you a definition of what viable consent is in a specific way. You can't just ignore the law and make excuses or blame the employees. On their part, they only have to prove that fingerprints were taken and consent was not. If you are they can just quit, then the entire point of the law is sl they won't have to and instead punish the company.