Employment law versus human rights law – The saga of CCTV cameras

A feature article by an Alumbo member, Mar 16, 2008         

It comes as no surprise to many that the UK has more CCTV cameras per person than anywhere else in the world; leading human rights lawyers to warn that their almost constant use in our everyday lives raises data protection and wider privacy concerns, since they can be used in an intrusive way.

But what are the limits? At the workplace, employers are permitted to monitor workers in so far as it is necessary and proportionate to the management’s reasons. CCTV monitoring is often undertaken for security reasons and is thus widely viewed as reasonable. It follows that employees naturally inspire reassurance from their respective employers that they are using CCTV responsibly.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) published its first CCTV Data Protection Code of Practice in 2000 to help CCTV operators comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) and follow good practice.

The Code of Practice: Monitoring at Work gives guidance on how to avoid employees calling in the lawyers over breaching the provisions of the DPA. The Code provides that before such monitoring is introduced, an impact assessment must be carried out to determine what (if any) monitoring is justified by the benefits of that monitoring. Under the DPA, any CCTV monitoring must normally be open and backed by fulfilling reasons.

The assessment should consider targeting the monitoring only at the areas of particular risk, confining it to areas where people's expectations of privacy would be low, using video and audio monitoring separately - cases where the use of both to be justified becomes rare. Its operation should only be where deemed necessary rather than continuous - although continuous monitoring may be justified where security is at risk. Finally, whether comparable benefits can be obtained by less intrusive methods and what adverse impact it may have on workers.

In making the assessment it is advisable for the employer to consult trade unions/employee representatives.

If the monitoring is introduced to enforce certain rules and standards, the employer must ensure that the workers are aware of and understand them. According to one employment lawyer, the use of CCTV to monitor the actions of employees has potential implications in respect of the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). If the surveillance is excessive, the implications may vary depending on whether the employer is a public or private body or individual.

ADVERTISEMENT: