3 ms·
To everyone claiming, that an employee has a right not to be recorded when working: in practice, he doesn't. There are security cameras on every floor in every
by krn 8y ago
To everyone claiming, that an employee has a right not to be recorded when working: in practice, he doesn't. There are security cameras on every floor in every office building. There are security cameras in every bar, restaurant, and gas station. And there are security cameras in every dealership, too.
- wolph 8y agoNo there are not cameras on every floor of every office building. It might be different for where you live but over here (the Netherlands) you can't needlessly film people. As an employer you cannot film your employees unless they have explicitly signed a contract that includes camera surveillance. Additionally you are only allowed to use cameras for security purposes if you can make a case that there is no other way to protect yourself. And before you're in view of any camera it must have been stated explicitly, or the cameras must be obvious before you're being filmed.
- usaphp 8y agoDon't you think there is a difference between being recorded by your employer since you have signed a contract with them which probably has those points in it, and a random person you never met before recording you without you knowing about it?
- krn 8y agoRandom people you never met before are recording you with their dashcams all the time in public places. If it was a problem at the dealership, the car owner should have been asked to turn off the dashcam before presenting the car, and no car should have been accepted for the service with the dashcam on.
- usaphp 8y ago> Random people you never met before are recording you with their dashcams all the time in public places But dealership is not a public place.
- Confiks 8y agoThe article is about Canada, but for EU law it wouldn't be a blanket rule that says that you may not be filmed while on the job, but rather that the filming must have a reasonable purpose. Filming the entrances for security reasons is such a reasonable purpose, but that means the footage may not be used for example to measure employee performance. Your argument, and you see this nihilistic tendency often in privacy discussions, is also based on some strange notion that if your privacy has been violated once (and you didn't voice your disapproval), it may be acceptably violated again. I see no reason for this to be.
- krn 8y ago> Your argument I'm not arguing that it's how it should be. I'm arguing that it's the way it is now in many parts of the world. It would be a normal procedure to request the car's owner to disable the dashcam before the service, and not to agree to service the car with the dashcam on. But no dealer has the right to turn off the dashcam himself.