The leak of the case of former Well being Secretary Matt Hancock through CCTV footage just lately made headlines, finally resulting in his resignation. Nevertheless, it has additionally raised questions relating to the GDPR and the privateness considerations related to video surveillance within the office.
So how can companies keep on the appropriate aspect of the regulation when implementing this know-how? Martin Noble, companion and Data protection regulation agency knowledgeable, explains Shakespeare Martineau.
Folks usually affiliate private knowledge with particulars like telephone numbers and e-mail addresses, however pictures of people additionally fall underneath the umbrella of non-public knowledge. Because of this, any enterprise that registers its workers by means of CCTV should comply with the proper GDPR processes or face severe penalties.
Earlier than putting in video surveillance, employers ought to carry out a Knowledge Safety Impression Evaluation (DPIA) when using surveillance digital camera knowledge is prone to pose a excessive threat to privateness. A DPIA identifies the dangers related to knowledge processing and methods to mitigate them. For instance, each particular person has the appropriate to privateness, and using video surveillance have to be justified when weighed in opposition to this. Employers ought to contemplate minimizing the affect on particular person privateness, for instance by putting cameras exterior places of work moderately than indoors or holding them solely in frequent areas and guaranteeing that ‘they don’t decide up sound. As a basic rule, if there’s a method to get the identical info in a much less intrusive approach, then this feature needs to be chosen. The DPIA also needs to establish the authorized foundation that the employer intends to make use of to make use of the video surveillance. If that is completed on the premise of recognized “professional pursuits”, they can not override particular person pursuits, rights and freedoms.
Nevertheless, it isn’t nearly holding a DPIA on file. As a part of the general evaluation, it might even be prudent to talk to related stakeholders within the enterprise, together with workers. After deciding to make use of video surveillance, employers might want to notify all workers that their knowledge is being captured. As a result of unbalanced nature of the employer-employee relationship, consent can’t be invoked as a authorized foundation for the processing of this knowledge. As a substitute, workers ought to be capable of entry a privateness coverage that units out the explanations the corporate depends on to handle knowledge. This could embody how it will likely be used, how it will likely be saved, how lengthy it will likely be saved, and who can entry it.
All knowledge collected ought to solely be utilized in accordance with the privateness coverage, for instance for well being and security causes or to watch worker conduct to stop misconduct. Notices also needs to be clearly positioned across the constructing to tell people who CCTV is in use, as guests also needs to learn that their private knowledge is being captured.
Nevertheless, if a enterprise proprietor has considerations a few specific worker, for instance, there isn’t any regulation prohibiting using secret cameras. Nonetheless, they have to nonetheless be capable of show that there’s a authorized foundation for crashing a digital camera, and that this isn’t outweighed by the rights of the person. A DPIA have to be carried out to cowl these circumstances.
Matt Hancock seems to have been captured by a secret digital camera, positioned there with out authorities permission. This was reported as an “outlier” which means he was not on the primary CCTV circuit or put in by his employer. Employers have an obligation to take care of their workers, which has raised security considerations about how pictures have been obtained within the first place. In the event that they may very well be discovered, the one who planted the digital camera would face a privateness breach criticism.
Even when they’re absolutely knowledgeable about using video surveillance within the office, workers nonetheless have the appropriate to object if they don’t agree with the way in which their private knowledge is processed. As a primary step, employers ought to provide to clarify the rationale behind video surveillance in additional element, as clarification of its objective and use could also be sufficient to reassure the worker. Nevertheless, in the event that they hold claiming it is too intrusive, employers will want to consider how greatest to maneuver ahead.
If there’s a specific digital camera that’s of concern, eradicating it might be the best possibility. However, if it’s the idea of video surveillance itself that the worker doesn’t agree with, then the employer should contemplate whether or not the rights of the person are prone to override. the professional pursuits it seeks to guard. In the event that they suppose their motives do not outweigh the worker’s rights, then they will select to maintain the cameras as they’re.
If the video surveillance stays in place and the worker continues to have considerations, the corporate may face a criticism from the info topic for violation of information safety legal guidelines and their proper to privateness. The worker additionally has the choice to ahead the criticism to the ICO, which has the facility to research and impose fines within the occasion of GDPR violation. These fines differ in response to the seriousness of the infringement and are capped at a a number of of their general turnover, which implies that they may end up in a big monetary loss for non-compliant firms. For this reason it’s important to have the ability to show the authorized foundation for using video surveillance.
Video surveillance is extra prevalent than ever now that the know-how is extra reasonably priced, with small and medium companies in addition to giant firms capable of set up it within the office. Nevertheless, there isn’t any threshold for GDPR compliance, with companies of all sizes having to comply with the appropriate procedures. Looking for authorized recommendation earlier than implementing video surveillance will help employers be sure that they’re finishing up the required checks, thus avoiding expensive fines.
CCTV footage: a GDPR nightmare?