It always bothers me when I see a h&s person quote the law. Make sure the gangs are aware that they wil be monitored at any time. Then do it Tell your HR to keep its nose out. Your organisation has a clear duty to supervise and manage

"Laws are for the guidance of wise men and the blind obedience of fools." (Solon, the Lawmaker of Athens, d. 559 BC)

They keep quoting rules on 'covert' and 'overt' coverage as issued by information commissioner :(

Assume the information commissioner is to do with the data protection act and maybe there is a human rights issue about snooping on folks e mails. Which may be fair enough Sounds like they have their little HR knickers in a twist ( and that's just the blokes!)

My thoughts and comments are: “can an employee insist that they are pre warned of any observational monitoring by an employer”. If you mean do you need the prior permission of employees to carry out specific unannounced spot checks as part of your supervision arrangements then the answer is no. Good practice, of course, is that such arrangements are explicit and described in your practice/procedures. Employees should understand that it will happen, why it is done and what will be done with the findings. They do not have any right to know when they will be carried out. Test of reasonableness is that it is a critical measure to adequately maintain the H&S of employees and members of the public; adequate supervision being a key part of any SSOW. However, if you mean more systematic monitoring / surveillance of the workplace (CCTV or video, GPS tracking, monitoring phones etc) then the DPA and HRA will come more into play as suggested by your HR people (who are professionals in their sector let’s remember). The right to privacy (article 8 of HRA) is a qualified right. An employer is permitted to monitor employees provided they make their intentions clear and that they have good cause to do this. I think, as OSH people, we might argue OSH is ‘good cause’? However, monitoring and surveillance of staff may, if excessive or disproportionate to the employer’s needs, be a breach of the Article 8 right to privacy. Before setting up any systematic surveillance/ monitoring employers are required by the Information Commission to consult staff and make their policy clear to all. Maybe this second aspect is what HR thinks you are discussing whereas you are talking about simple supervision activity? Either way provided that the process and purpose is explicit then there should not be a problem provided proper controls are in place..

I found this when I was looking at this issue. http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4470 Andy

I would prefer to call it 'monitoring' as 'surveillance' implies a covert operation with or without recording equipment. As others have said, HR are talking their usual nonsense - where do these people come from? Monitoring the performance of personnel is all part of a management system. Checks can be made announced or unannounced, whichever proves the most beneficial - it's not spying and if personnel are working to the standards set by the company then they have nothing to fear.