Video Surveillance скачать в хорошем качестве

Video Surveillance

With video surveillance becoming increasingly common in everyday life, employers use video cameras to keep tabs on both customers and employees. In general, employers can turn video cameras on their employees without significant legal concerns. The Fourth Amendment claim of an employee of a public university who was videotaped stealing money from the university box office failed. Even though the video camera was hidden and she was not warned about being subject to video surveillance, the court concluded that her constitutional rights had not been violated. In reaching the conclusion that she had no reasonable expectation of privacy, the court relied heavily on the facts that her work area was open to view by both coworkers and the public and her job involved the handling of money. However, although informing employees that they are subject to surveillance is clearly not necessary in all cases, employers are on surer legal ground if they inform employees that they are subject to monitoring and surveillance. Employers must not conduct surveillance of employees engaged in protected concerted activities, including union organizing. Video surveillance that occurs off the job is more likely to break privacy law than is surveillance performed in the workplace. Many of these cases involve employers enlisting investigators to determine whether employees claiming workers’ compensation or disability benefits are really unable to work. Surveillance of employees outside the workplace, if it occurs at all, must be limited to public areas.