Video surveillance in the workplace and data protection
In the workplace, the security of people, goods and facilities has become increasingly important, which has led companies to adopt video surveillance systems as a preventive and control measure. However, the use of cameras in the workplace generates tensions with other fundamental rights, especially the right to privacy and the protection of workers’ personal data. In this sense, both national and European regulations, through the Organic Law on the Protection of Personal Data and Guarantee of Digital Rights (LOPDGDD) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), establish precise limits for the processing of personal data in the workplace.
In this way, the legal implications of the use of video surveillance in the work environment will be analysed in accordance with the current regulations. In particular, the rights of workers in relation to the protection of their data and the employer’s duty to comply with the principles of transparency and proportionality in the use of these systems will be examined.
Regulation according to the LOPDGDD
The use of video surveillance cameras in the work environment is regulated by article 22.1 of the LOPDGDD, which establishes the conditions under which images may be captured and processed in the work environment. According to this article, natural or legal persons, public or private, may carry out the processing of images through camera or video camera systems for the purpose of preserving the security of persons and property, as well as their installations. However, their installation and use are subject to clear limits aimed at protecting people’s privacy.
One of the most relevant aspects addressed by the LOPDGDD is the restriction on the capture of images of public roads. It will only be possible to capture images of public spaces when it is necessary to guarantee the security of strategic assets or installations or of infrastructures linked to transport, and in no case may it involve the capture of images of the interior of a private home (art. 22.2 LOPDGDD). Otherwise, the capture of images of the public highway could be considered a violation of citizens’ right to privacy.
Likewise, paragraph 3 of the article establishes that the recordings obtained through video surveillance systems must be deleted within a maximum period of one month, unless these recordings are necessary to prove the commission of crimes or offences. In that case, the images must be made available to the competent authorities within a maximum of 72 hours.
Article 22 also underlines the need to comply with the duty of information provided for in Article 12 of Regulation 2016/679. The LOPDGDD requires employers to inform workers of the existence of cameras by placing visible information devices, thus complying with the transparency principle set out in the GDPR. These devices must contain, at a minimum, the identity of the data controller and the possibility of exercising the rights of access, rectification, erasure, restriction of processing, portability and objection.
Limits and obligations
The control of work activity is one of the most common reasons for the installation of video surveillance systems in companies. Article 20.3 of the Employee Statute grants the employer the power to adopt the measures that he/she considers most appropriate for surveillance and control in order to verify the fulfilment by the worker of his/her work obligations and duties, taking into account, where appropriate, the real capacity of workers with disabilities. However, these measures must always respect the dignity of the worker and the fundamental rights inherent to him/her, such as the right to privacy.
In this context, article 89 of the LOPDGDD specifically regulates the use of video surveillance for labour monitoring. Accordingly, the employer may use surveillance cameras to monitor the activity of workers, provided that this monitoring is carried out within the legal limits and the employees are informed in advance. The obligation to inform is essential to ensure that workers are aware of the video surveillance measures to which they are subject. If the flagrant commission of an unlawful act by an employee is detected, the employer will be considered to have fulfilled his obligation to inform if he has put in place the corresponding information devices.
However, the regulations impose clear limits on the installation of cameras in certain areas of the workplace. Under no circumstances will video surveillance be allowed in areas intended for employees’ rest, as this would be an intrusion into their privacy.
Likewise, with regard to sound recording, article 89.3 establishes that it will only be possible in those cases in which there are significant risks to the security of persons or installations, and provided that the principles of proportionality and minimum intervention are respected. In addition, the treatment of sound recordings must follow the same conservation and elimination periods as images.
Proportionality between company control and workers’ rights
The right to privacy in the digital environment and against the use of video surveillance devices is recognised in article 20 bis of the Employee Statute. This article protects employees against possible abuses in the use of technological tools by employers. In this sense, it establishes the right of workers to digitally disconnect from their work obligations outside working hours and to preserve their privacy in the use of the digital devices that the employer makes available to them to carry out their work.
The use of video surveillance in the workplace must therefore respect these rights, and any monitoring measures taken by the employer must be proportionate and in line with legitimate business purposes. In particular, article 4.2.e of the Employee Statute underlines that workers have the right to respect for their privacy and dignity, including protection against possible abuses in the use of surveillance tools such as cameras and geolocation systems.
It is essential that employers establish clear and public criteria for the use of video-surveillance devices, and that they adequately inform workers about the conditions under which these systems will be used. Workers‘ representatives should be involved in the elaboration of these criteria, thus ensuring a social dialogue that strikes a fair balance between business needs and the protection of employees’ fundamental rights.
In conclusion, video surveillance in the workplace is a useful tool to ensure security and control, but its use must comply with the regulations that protect the privacy and rights of workers. The LOPDGDD and the RGPD require employers to act with transparency and proportionality, providing adequate information about the installation of these systems.
It is essential that companies strike a balance between their monitoring needs and respect for employees’ fundamental rights, ensuring that surveillance measures are justified and do not violate their dignity and privacy.
Letslaw es una firma de abogados internacionales especializada en el derecho de los negocios.