track people in offices has long been the norm.Let us not take the moral and ethical side of the issue, let us look at how this is legal?
According to employers, surveillance of people at work is quite legitimate and justified.Company management explains the video surveillance staff that the only way they can control, what exactly are engaged employees, as used office equipment, they do not violate internal rules, etc.Staff from such scrutiny is not happy and believes surveillance invasion of privacy.On that management responds immediately that the work can not have any privacy.Who is right?
all depends on how the surveillance of a person: open or not.That is, the problem lies in the question of whether a person knows about the installed cameras and other programs on your computer that "merge" all the information to the administrator.Covert Surveillance, in fact, illegal.However, there are nuances: if an employee is suspected of criminal activity such as theft or confidentially transfer information to competitors, such surveillance is justified.That is, the more violations reveal covert surveillance, the greater the chance that he would be considered legitimate if the conflict parties.
In all other cases, the surveillance of a person must be carried out with his written consent.But this does not mean that if an employee against surveillance, it may require to remove the camera and remove the program from your computer monitor.The most he can do - quit and find another job, if it is not satisfied with this situation.Therefore, carefully read the employment contract and its annex.It was there that should be spelled out conditions for the control over the staff.In addition, employees should be familiar with the internal rules of the company, for breach of which will be followed by punitive measures.To those include how to use the Internet, the list of allowed sites, regulated rest time during the working day, etc.This is the case when ignorance excuse.
Another question: "Where it is possible to install a video device?"Some employers are not limited to office space, but also exercise control over the lounges, dining rooms, hallways, showers and toilets.In the latter two cases, you can easily sue.
To install video surveillance in such places, the employer must have a very good reason.
Another controversial point - the surveillance of a person in the workplace with the help of wiretapping phones.Such control may be exercised only on the corporate telephony, otherwise it will be considered a breach of privacy.Information obtained from telephone tapping, which is personal in nature (talking to your doctor, lawyer, etc.), shall not be disclosed.And this is the main problem for many companies: the leak of personal information due to which employees are categorically against any control.
controversial points in these situations a lot, so observation of the staff - this is a classic example of the fact that technological progress has overtaken the creation of a legal framework elaborated.
