Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By wayne purchase
Hi All,
here is a good one for you, I have just been ask to look in to the use of CCTV for the monitoring of Health and Safety in a production area?
My response to this was who will be monitoring the system during work hours to which i got the reply no one it will just be recorded???
i know there are data protection issues but is there any way you could use a non monitored system for health and safety?
cheers
wayne
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Futcher
Seems to me that the system as suggested will only be used to check who did what after the accident, in an attempt to say "the employee was doing something wrong"
1984 and Big Brother truly will have arrived if you install this.
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kirsty Davies2
Wayne,
What do you mean by data protection issues?
CCTV is a good control measure to protect people & Property. No-one should make a fuss over this. Just erase the recording after a week or so.
Alternatively, employee one more person to keep an eye on CCTV. SIMPLE
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kirsty Davies2
To be honest, I could never get round to 'big brother' debate.
I don't know why people are so hesitant to have CCTV at workplaces.
According to H&S Law employees are supposed to be supervised/monitored. Is this a 'big brother' thing. It's not that you are going to have a CCTV at employee homes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Futcher
Since Wayne was told no-one will be monitoring - it will just be recorded, the only reason I can see for it will be as a check-back record after an incident.
Why will the management want to check back? to see who was doing what. Bet your bottom dollar, it will be then used to "prove" the employee was not following procedures, and then open the way down the disciplinary route to the exit door.
Or perhaps I'm just an old cynic...
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By wayne purchase
Kirsty,
what your saying is true and I fully agree, the issue I have is that i know the staff dont see it that way and as you will probably understand anyone working in health and safety wont have time to monitor the cctv system(the employer isnt looking to employ any one else)
is there any does or donts that anyone can think of if a system like this is installed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Futcher
As far as I can see, any CCTV is reactive.
I believe safety, although needing reactive measures, must not rely on them. Surely if the company feels that there are safety issues that can be "monitored" by CCTV, wouldn't it be better to put in place active measures to prevent the issues to start with?
I must take more anti-grumpiness pills...
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kirsty Davies2
Ian,
You don't need to take anti-grumpiness tablets ....
You raised a very good point here. CCTV without an operator is reactive rather than a proactive measure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Amandac
You will need to look at the Data Protection issue and you will need to have a retention policy and destroy dates for the tapes. You will also need to display signage that CCTV is in use on the premises.
I suggest you do some homework so you are able to advise management in order for them to make decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Is is my understanding that CCVTV in the workplace can only be used for security purposes (ie detect a potential crime) and not to covertly spy on the workforce. Furthermore there is a strict CoP which employers must adhere to or they will be in breach of the law.
Hence I do not believe that CCTV can be legally used for so-called health and safety monitoring.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Steve
No, I think it is proactive, in a negative sort of way. It will influence how people behave, and that influence may even become embedded in the culture many months/years down the line.
I think IR issues are your biggest hurdle
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Futcher
Kirsty/Wayne
Kirsty: Your middle link is interesting as it points out that a private organisation has the right to put obvious CCTV cameras anywhere, as it is then unlikely to breach any rights in HRA or typical employment contracts.
Wayne: therefore your company can probably post these cameras anywhere obvious that it likes, and can follow the requirements of the Data Protection act and delete old recordings after the requisite period, and there is "no problem".
My point still remains: What is the real rationale behind it? Why not put in a system that prevents, rather than reacts?
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48
Ian, why do not see pro-active and re-active measures as mutually supportive? Even in the best run organisation things go wrong, what better than a CCTV loop for the investigation team to review?
In my experience it is just as likely that the video will show competent conscientious employees following procedure. It can often reveal passive errors/failures that might otherwise have been charged against an employee.
Equally though I do agree that it can also identify unscrupulous behaviour and aid unscrupulous management but that is no reason not to consider its use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Richards
I know one place where cctv is used to monitor the workforce while they are working.
The manager used it to time "toilet breaks" and "fag" breaks.
You need to ask yourself what you are going to do if you get a subject access request from an employee....
http://www.ico.gov.uk/up.../9_responsibilities.html
Once they know they are being monitored, the requests will flood in....they did in the company above.
It occupied so much time.....and do not forget....you cannot include OTHER people in the subject access....
Don't forget the notices....it'll cost you if you do.
Toilet cams get damaged very quickly....just thought I'd let you know that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Richard Altoft
A heavy fabrication company I visit regularly had an incident when a worker dropped a large fabrication on his foot. He was offered dubious advice and started a claim and also brought in the HSE by alleging lack of training etc. CCTV used for security reasons had been left on and showed quite clearly that a crane had been available and the operative had taken a short cut and tried to move the fabrication on his own. Civil case dropped and HSE took no action. The real prize in all this -- the injured party is back at work and is now one of the best allies in convincing others to act sensibly.
Managers are obliged to manage H&S and should use suitable methods. In fact Reg 5 of MHSW requires them to monitor so why not use CCTV
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Barry Cooper
Wayne
We were considering installing CCTV for H&S reasons. We checked with the Data controller under the Data protection Act, as you must register if you manage certain data, CCTV being one of them.
The rules state that you should only use the CCTV images for the purpose for which it was installed.
In our particular case we used to to monitor that employees were following procedures and working safely. We recorded the images, and when we wanted we could look back to undertake audits.
One example was the loading area, where HGV's were loaded with reels of paper. Access to this area was strictly controlled, and people had to sign in, and announce themselves over short wave radio, which all FLT drivers held.
When we went in to audit them, they knew we were coming and followed the procedures to the letter, but we were still having incidents.
We all ready had CCTV in the area for security, and when we looked at the recordings we observed the drivers failing to follow any procedure, with a total disregard for safety. No wonder we awere having incidents
We then played back these recordings to the drivers themselves, and they were shocked at all the near misses observed.
Safety behaviour improved drastically and incidents dropped too.
May sound a bit like big brother, but it worked, also when there was a damage incident, the person owned up, as he knew he was on CCTV.
Barry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
CCTV in the workplace has its place -ideal for monitoring what's going on in enclosures during licensed asbestos work, for example.
I smell a rat here though, Wayne. Could it be that your employer has his own particular agenda for the installation of CCTV?
Wouldn't it be very convenient if this CCTV could be installed "for health and safety reasons"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Richards
Most "private" cctv installations are not "legal". They are not registered with the ico.
"Guidance provided by the Information Commissioner specifies that only certain CCTV activities will require registration under the Data Protection Act 1998. In general, if you answer yes to any of the following three questions then you are likely to require registration:
Do you operate the cameras remotely in order to zoom in/out or point in different directions to pick up what particular people are doing?
**Do you ever use the images to try to observe someone’s behaviour for your own business purposes, such as monitoring of staff members?**
Do you ever give the recorded images to anyone other than a law enforcement agency such as the police?
Businesses seeking further advice or wanting to register should contact the Information Commissioner direct"
PLEASE don't forget the subject access provisions, and you cannot just copy a tape and hand it over...it should only show the subject requesting the data.
You may even need to use an outside company to edit the data if a subject access is received.
And if the system does record an accident, you can expect requests for that data from the person/s involved and/or their solicitors. So you may need to store data concerning any accident for a longer period of time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David J Jones
Putting aside the arguments both for and against CCTV in the workplace, for the moment, there are a couple of issues regarding "keeping tapes".
Modern CCTV recorders no longer use any form of "tape". They are now universally DVR's (digital video recorders), or put another way, a computer in a different "box" the heart of which is hard disk drives onto which the camera(s)images are recorded. Each manufacturer will configure their DVR to operate in different ways but essentially they will be capable of being set-up to either stop recording when the disks are full or, more normally, will "over write" the earliest recorded images as the disk reaches capacity. This will give a certain number of days of recorded images. However, this length of recording time will also be affected by DVR capacity, measured in Giga bytes, the number of cameras connected to it, as well as other factors such as how the camera(s) are set up to record as well as the use of fixed or fully active "dome" cameras.
If images are required to be recorded onto CD for evidential purposes, this is governed by the principles of the Data Protection Act. The Act is also clear in who has access to the equipment and recorded data.
That aside, CCTV in the workplace, for the right reasons, can be a benefit for all as has been pointed out in previous postings.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Futcher
Pete48
I am fully for active and reactive measures. It just sounds to me like Wayne's company is only being reactive, and as I said above, we should not rely on a solely reactive stance.
Ron Hunter
I'm with you in smelling a rat.
PS - the word is active, not pro-active
PPS - the anti-grumpiness pills have not kicked in yet
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kirsty Davies2
Ian,
in Health and Safety, the word used are proactive and reactive. There's nothing wrong using these words. (both words are ACTIVE measures)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
proactive: to act before the event
active: to act in real-time during the event
reactive: act after the event.
Plan, implement & review perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Richards
I think they are very forward-looking.
Most employers would not even consider giving their employees the means to apportion blame in the case of an accident, let alone the means to prove company liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48
Absolutely John, is this one of those rare win-wins then?
Have a good weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rodger Alan Ker
A little belatedly.
The HSE Asbestos Licensing Group (ALG) issued a guidance memo in 2007 (2/07) entitled "the role of viewing panels and cctv".
"Where viewing panels are not reasonably practicable or where they do not allow good visibility of the active work area, a cctv system should be installed such that ongoing work can be seen".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.