Rank: New forum user 
|
Hi All, I have been searching the internet for answers and I am wondering. Can a member of the public walk up to a member of staff working within a site boundary Construction site/ Highway Working and take photos of them at work? Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Anyone may take photographs or film anything in any public area, with the execption of certain places relating to high level security.
So if a member of the public wishes to take photographs/film a construction site or persons working whilst they are in the public domain they may do so.
|
 1 user thanked freelance safety for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I think the question is: is this private property? If its a public highway then people can take any photos they like. If they're asked to stop and then persist it could constitute harrassment, likewise if the photographer is aggressive. If its private property they can only enter the site with permission anyway, and the property owner can forbid them from taking photos. However, they can stand outside the private property and take photos of it from there. There are restrictions on what they can do with the photographs once they have them, but they aren't very limiting,
John
|
1 user thanked jwk for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I would just like to add that if the private land happens to be a school or where there are children present, then you are not allowed to take photographs from outside the area for safeguarding reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Locked doors keep out honest men and rules restrict the law abiding.
Anyone will do as they see fit for their own purposes - the fine line comes when you confront someone who thinks they have a right when the law says different and how far you go to enforce that which they do not recognise. Even following a school photographer to their home can find the honest on the wrong side of the law especially in these days of anti-social media vigilantism
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Locked doors keep out honest men and rules restrict the law abiding.
Anyone will do as they see fit for their own purposes - the fine line comes when you confront someone who thinks they have a right when the law says different and how far you go to enforce that which they do not recognise. Even following a school photographer to their home can find the honest on the wrong side of the law especially in these days of anti-social media vigilantism
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Zyggy  I would just like to add that if the private land happens to be a school or where there are children present, then you are not allowed to take photographs from outside the area for safeguarding reasons.
Ziggy, I'm not sure that's true. The relevant legislation has nothing to say about taking photographs of children anyway. You might be investigated for other offences if you took unwanted photos of children, but in itself I'm pretty sure its not an offence,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
John, I beg to differ!
Photographs constitute personal data & are subject to the Data Protection Act 2018 where using images requires consent from those with parental responsibility.
If a photograph is taken from outside a school to highlight work taking place within it & there happen to be children in the vicinity that can be clearly identified, then it cannot be used without express consent.
I was recently involved in such a situation where a person was trying to gather evidence of what he perceived to be poor working at height practices & was subsequently threatened with action if he carried on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2018/12/sleigh-ing-the-christmas-gdpr-myths/
See section regarding nativity plays In a public place anyone can photograph whatever they want (so long as it is not for terrorist purposes or a threat to national security). In your school scenario the children would have been incidental to the work at height subject just as I frequently end up being when someone does a (group) selfie in a public area. Where my permission would be required is in the event I am the subject and the photographer wishes to publish the image - here it is not about data but image rights and any financial reward from publication or distribution. If permission had to be sought from every individual in every photograph uploaded to social media those behind the platforms had better watch out.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2018/12/sleigh-ing-the-christmas-gdpr-myths/
See section regarding nativity plays In a public place anyone can photograph whatever they want (so long as it is not for terrorist purposes or a threat to national security). In your school scenario the children would have been incidental to the work at height subject just as I frequently end up being when someone does a (group) selfie in a public area. Where my permission would be required is in the event I am the subject and the photographer wishes to publish the image - here it is not about data but image rights and any financial reward from publication or distribution. If permission had to be sought from every individual in every photograph uploaded to social media those behind the platforms had better watch out.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
If you go onto the Information Commissioners Office website & type in "taking photos in "schools" it will give a number of examples which can broadly be split into two areas: private use, where data protection does not apply & official use where it does.
Whilst this advice is not crystal clear, I still maintain that consent is required in the example I gave, & safeguarding issues have to be considered before any photographs are taken which can identify children and/or their location.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
You pick - 1998 or 2018 - please provide the specific line in the Data Protection Act (aka GDPR) that mandates consent to photograph. Confusing safe guarding within a school where they have a duty of care when such children are present and may not be publicly identified is not the same as an absolute requirement for consent to photograph from a public place especially where the children are incidental to the subject (breach of HASAW - not your choice if the observer "perceived" the HSE would decide appropriate action based upon evidence).
Safe guarded children will at some stage be in a town/city, venue or public transport with CCTV i.e. the capacity to capture an image - how does your consent argument get resolved in this circumstance?
|
4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
stillp on 23/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC), stillp on 23/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
You pick - 1998 or 2018 - please provide the specific line in the Data Protection Act (aka GDPR) that mandates consent to photograph. Confusing safe guarding within a school where they have a duty of care when such children are present and may not be publicly identified is not the same as an absolute requirement for consent to photograph from a public place especially where the children are incidental to the subject (breach of HASAW - not your choice if the observer "perceived" the HSE would decide appropriate action based upon evidence).
Safe guarded children will at some stage be in a town/city, venue or public transport with CCTV i.e. the capacity to capture an image - how does your consent argument get resolved in this circumstance?
|
4 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
stillp on 23/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC), stillp on 23/02/2019(UTC), jwk on 26/02/2019(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In the OP scenario, where the photographer is described as coming into/onto the work site, apart from asking the person to leave the premises/site, not much you can do about hte photos that have already been taken.
Some sites have terms & conditions about taking photos by those entering the site. Seems a good idea but really quite difficult to deal with once the images have been taken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
If someone comes onto your site, for whatever reason without a good cause ie they have not been invited or are allowed on the site for some other reason, then they are trespassers. Trespass is (usually) a civil tort not a criminal act and you can sue them for trespass but they cannot be arrested by the police etc. if they do this repeatedly then you might be able to get an injunction against them to stop them turning up on site. If they harass your workers then this might constitute a breach of the peace, for which they can be arrested. You ask them then to leave and they refuse this might also constitute a breach of the peace. The photos are the property of the photographer but again it might be possible to take civil action against them if publishing them might be detrimental to the organisation but this is a very grey area. You can’t just take the camera off them as that might be theft. The above legal reasons are why it is a good idea to control access to the worksite and to make sure that your fences etc. are intact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Zyggy John, I beg to differ!
Photographs constitute personal data & are subject to the Data Protection Act 2018 where using images requires consent from those with parental responsibility.
If a photograph is taken from outside a school to highlight work taking place within it & there happen to be children in the vicinity that can be clearly identified, then it cannot be used without express consent.
I was recently involved in such a situation where a person was trying to gather evidence of what he perceived to be poor working at height practices & was subsequently threatened with action if he carried on.
Hi Ziggy,
Absolutely agree with Round's comments, and it's also important to bear in mind that whatever guidance the ICO (or HSE, or FSA or whoever) gives is not the same as the legislation. I know that HSE is often unclear (especially with RIDDOR!) and see no reason why the ICO should not be the same.
Also please see my original comment: taking a photo from public land is perfectly legal, whatever the subject, but as I say, there may be restrictions on the use you can put it to. In some circumstances consent may be needed, but its consent to the use, not the photography. Safeguarding only applies to duty holders, and is about preventing harm: it may be the new 'elf'n'safety' with regards to mission-creep, jobsworthiness and an all-pervading low grade fear of doing things wrong,
John
Edited by user 26 February 2019 12:55:23(UTC)
| Reason: Tpying erros
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I'd be more interested in WHY the person is taking the photos. Is it to report an unsafe act or something they are concerned about to the relevant body or as part of an investigation into a specific person (they're claiming for an accident that's caused serious injury but they are working on the site so the claim is fraudulent).
Is it a property they are buying (new housing development) and they want to record the stages of the house build - I did this with my first property, taking photos of the house being built from the foundations up. While most of the photos were taken at the weekend when there was no workers, there was the occasional photo taken when there was staff in the photos.
But as others have said, if the land is closed off and they have entered without permission then you would be within your rights to ask them to leave or at least ask what they think they are doing.
|
2 users thanked Melrose80086 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
under UK law a person may take photos of any building or person if they are in a public space. (some exceptions of course) including children. the right of privacy only comes into effect if the photos are for commercial use.
no member of the public, seurity guard (despite what some think), or a police officer can order the images deleted. only a court order can do that.
as was stated by melrose why they want to take photos is intersting but not illegal
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: mike52 the right of privacy only comes into effect if the photos are for commercial use
Poor choice of words is exactly why posts like this occur - as stated earlier it is not about privacy rights but image rights - control on how the image is used in a commercial environment (specified use or stock) with agreement between subject and photographer on any financial gain from the use and re-publication of the image. Publishers ask photographers to prove they have rights to an image not that the subject has agreed to waive their privacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: mike52 the right of privacy only comes into effect if the photos are for commercial use
Poor choice of words is exactly why posts like this occur - as stated earlier it is not about privacy rights but image rights - control on how the image is used in a commercial environment (specified use or stock) with agreement between subject and photographer on any financial gain from the use and re-publication of the image. Publishers ask photographers to prove they have rights to an image not that the subject has agreed to waive their privacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.