Cameras in the Workplace

[blackthorn]

We`ve got a new manager at work and he`s had cameras put up all over the place. He now wants to put a camera in our staff room. His reasoning is that it`s for security reasons but we all know it is to moniter tea and dinner breaks. We are keeping him at bay for the moment by telling him that the female staff members get changed in there. In the end, he probably will just go ahead and install them. Can he do this?

[jellybaby]

just found these 2 articles, which maybe of some interest to you

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/340697.stm

http://www.oneclickhr.com/?hrguide/a...7&hrupdate=106

This is not UK law but i would have thought the same principles might be true so might be worth you searching this out.

When can an employer use covert video surveillance in the workplace?

If an employer wishes to use covert video surveillance there are a number of requirements that must be observed:

· it must be used only to detect whether an employee is engaged in an unlawful activity in the workplace Section 7(1)(a). It is not allowed to be used to check whether an employee is present or is doing his or her job properly, or for other monitoring purposes;
· the employer must obtain a covert surveillance authority from a Magistrate approving the covert surveillance Section 7(1)(b);
· the surveillance must be carried out in accordance with the terms of the covert surveillance authority Section 18;
· the surveillance must not continue for more than 30 days Section 16;
· the covert surveillance must not take place in a change room, toilet, shower or bathing facility Section 9(3)(b); and
· the surveillance must be overseen by a nominated licensed security operator Section 9(2)(a). Licensed security operator is defined at s.3 to be "a person holding a Class 1 licence issued under the Security (Protection) Industry Act 1985 or a licence of a corresponding kind issued under any Act that replaces that Act". The Security (Protection) Industry Act 1985 has since been replaced by the Security Industry Act 1997. Under s.11(1) of that Act, a Class 1A licence authorises the licensee to "patrol, guard, watch or protect property ... ". The requirements for obtaining and operating under such a licence are set out in that Act; for example, holders of Class 1A licences must be employed by a person holding a 'master licence' issued under that Act. .

Employers are strongly advised to contract a licensed security operator to set up and conduct any covert video surveillance.

After the covert surveillance has taken place employers have a number of further obligations:

· the employer must not use the recording for an irrelevant purpose (that is one unrelated to legal action, disciplinary action or amending security procedures as a result of the illegal activity) Section 8;
· the employer must ensure that any recordings within his or her control are protected against loss, unauthorised access or use. (One precaution that could be taken is for an employer to erase all recordings as soon as they cease to be of use in relation to disciplinary or legal action);
· the employer also has a duty to report back in writing to the Magistrate issuing the authority, within 30 days of its expiry, the results of the surveillance Section 23; and
· if the employer proposes to take any detrimental action against an employee as a result of the covert surveillance, then that employer should provide the employee or the employee's lawyer with reasonable access to the recording Section 17(1)(d).

[Stuartbe]

Originally Posted by blackthorn

We`ve got a new manager at work and he`s had cameras put up all over the place. He now wants to put a camera in our staff room. His reasoning is that it`s for security reasons but we all know it is to moniter tea and dinner breaks. We are keeping him at bay for the moment by telling him that the female staff members get changed in there. In the end, he probably will just go ahead and install them. Can he do this?

If you have a health and safety rep. at work talk to them about it. The DPA has strict rules about cctv monitoring. The law is a bit flakey on this but if he does install them you have a right to access the recordings.

[blackthorn]

Thanks for the links, good reading I think I`ll have to dig a bit deeper than this though because the cameras he`s having fitted aren`t covert ones, they are quite open and plain to see.

[Tricky]

Originally Posted by blackthorn

Thanks for the links, good reading I think I`ll have to dig a bit deeper than this though because the cameras he`s having fitted aren`t covert ones, they are quite open and plain to see.

Also depends on the sort of workplace - I've seen "Fake" and "Real" ones installed to stop petty theiving in the workplace. Ignoring the "Changing Facilities" of the staff room (use the toilets - if cameras go in there you've got something to complain about) if you are force to leave your personal effects in there at least you know they are monitored.

CCTV is everywhere now and you've probably been "watched" at somepoint in the last few weeks. Fact of life they are there and if your boss is installing them in the open then no problem, he's or she is not hiding anything - have you asked why they are being installed?

[paulyoung666]

Originally Posted by blackthorn

Thanks for the links, good reading I think I`ll have to dig a bit deeper than this though because the cameras he`s having fitted aren`t covert ones, they are quite open and plain to see.

another point is , if you are doing nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about , if you take your tea breaks as allowed then you havent got a problem , i would just let him put them up and let him think he has won , then find some other more sneaky way to get back at him for being a ****** , of course there is the other side of the coin that says he may be genuine and looking after your welfare after all , ok then maybe not

[Russ]

One company I used to work for (and for legal reasons I won't name them - yet) tried to get away with putting cameras in the blokes' toilets as they were suspecting certain individuals of nipping in there to 'relieve' themselves in unconventional ways...

They are currently being sued....

[Stuartbe]

Originally Posted by paulyoung666

another point is , if you are doing nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about , if you take your tea breaks as allowed then you havent got a problem , i would just let him put them up and let him think he has won , then find some other more sneaky way to get back at him for being a ****** , of course there is the other side of the coin that says he may be genuine and looking after your welfare after all , ok then maybe not

Even better - Come in one morning with all the guys wearing skirts and bra's and dance around in front of the camera. Then hide all the stuff and change into normal clothes.....

If he asks what was going on just say you dont know what he si talking about. He will most likely check his coffee for drugs and call in the CCTV company

[paulyoung666]

Originally Posted by stuartbe

Even better - Come in one morning with all the guys wearing skirts and bra's and dance around in front of the camera. Then hide all the stuff and change into normal clothes.....

If he asks what was going on just say you dont know what he si talking about. He will most likely check his coffee for drugs and call in the CCTV company

pmsl @ that

[erol]

A bit divergent from topic, if not totaly off topic.

Whilst in the UK I helped my brother camera up the three cafes he owns. One of the cafes already had an old analogue system linked to timelapse VCR, but we decided to go the whole network hog and put in DSL connections at each shop and using lan cams (from Axis, nice kit) my brother can now monitor the shops from home or anywhere with a net connection. The cameras are also linked into the alarms in the shops so if overnight someone breaks in the start sending images to a server in a location other than the one being broken into (he had a break in where the old analogue cameras were and the thieves simply took the VCR tape with them).

I used zen internet for the DSL lines in the shops and at his home as they provide, at no extra cost, 8 public and static IP addresses, which make setting up the cameras easy. I used these in conjunction with Draytek/ Vigor routers. Zen also claim no contention _within_ their own network, which is great for this app (though you still get contention on the BT part of the link of course). These plugged into the DSL line will come up automaticaly after a power down and the cameras are online. They also come with LAN to LAN VPN facilites, which means it was easy to set up a VPN between all the sites so that he can print from home machine to a printer attached to a machine in one of the shops (or to a printer connected directly to the draytek - though to be honest I didnt get that working in the time I had in the UK). Oh and the drayteks all have wifi as well so he can wander round the cafes with his laptop and access his files at home or on the net.

So he now has 5 LAN cameras in 3 shops, all accessable over the internet (with passwords of course). He also has a VPN that covers all three shops and his home office. He also has wifi in all the cafes (though no plans to offer it to customer atm). This all runs on Zens own uncontended (once you reach it via BT's contended network) network.

Even imagining trying such an app on NTL's network (using non business products) would be a non starter. No static IP's which makes it harder. The cap would soon become a problem as well. The 128kbs upload is a limit too. This is a high volume internal application (needing no net access at all really if the cameras are being viewed or recorded from any of the sites). For me this is an example of where Zen are getting things right and NTL are not. Zen were helpfull and supportive through out this. They want to drive up usage and uses of their products, not restrict and limit them.

To get back on topic a bit more, I was a bit moraly concerned about helping put cameras in the work place. However these are not hidden or covert cameras. They are clearly seeable and all the staff know they are their. They do also provide some degree of protection for his staff as well. Of course part of the objective of them is to keep his staff 'on their toes' on the basis that they _might_ be being watched. The reality is that they rarely are (once the novelty wears off )

Once I get my own sat link up and running here (soon hopefully) I intend to get myself a draytek router (not cheap but I have grown to love these boxes) and plug myself into his VPN network of his house and 3 shops too. Of course I would like symetrical 10mbs or even better 100mbs links for this but it still has uses on a half meg connection. So who wants more bandwidth and is not a 'warez merchant'? My brother (and me (ish)) for a start. !

[zoombini]

Hmm, some suggestions:
1) Take a polaroid from the same place as the camera & stick it in front.
2) Clean the camera lense with ZIF, Jif, wire wool etc.
3) Paint the camera.
4) Stick some useless poster over it.
5) get an air gun & shoot it from round the corner.
6) see a lawyer.

Originally Posted by paulyoung666

another point is , if you are doing nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about

Oh gods, not *AGAIN*!!

Look, Paul, which would you prefer:

1) Your boss *constantly* looking over your shoulder, no matter what you are doing, "just in case" or...

2) Your boss *not* checking up on you unless there is actually *proof* or at least reasonable grounds that a crime is being committed?

Personally anyone who went for option 1) is someone that I would *not* work for because he has *no* respect for his employees nor trust in them and I would, in turn, have no respect or trust for him since he has no idea about the concept of "presumed innocent until proven guilty"!

[paulyoung666]

Originally Posted by Graham

Oh gods, not *AGAIN*!!

Look, Paul, which would you prefer:

1) Your boss *constantly* looking over your shoulder, no matter what you are doing, "just in case" or...

2) Your boss *not* checking up on you unless there is actually *proof* or at least reasonable grounds that a crime is being committed?

Personally anyone who went for option 1) is someone that I would *not* work for because he has *no* respect for his employees nor trust in them and I would, in turn, have no respect or trust for him since he has no idea about the concept of "presumed innocent until proven guilty"!

suit yourself graham , if i have done nothing wrong i have nothing to fear , simple as that , do you avoid town centres because they have cctv ???????????

[blackthorn]

I`ve worked at this place and used the same staff room for 9 years and in all that time, we have not had one theft. Along comes this new manager and the first thing he wants to do is install is a camera. I`ve approached him and asked him why and he tells me its for security reasons. I then point out that we`ve never had anything go missing, so why now. He then adds on that he could moniter tea and dinner breaks as well. So, I think that is the real reason.