The Workers’ Statute provides the employer with the possibility of adopting appropriate measures to ensure that employees comply with the obligations and duties derived from their job position, as well as tools that help with the security and protection of the company’s assets.
In this regard, Article 20.3 of the aforementioned regulation, in line with what is established in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, allows the installation of video surveillance systems, provided that they are compatible with the dignity of employees and, therefore, respect their fundamental rights.
For this reason, although the employer is recognized to have the power of control over employees through the installation of surveillance devices, it is necessary and essential for the employer to provide prior, express, clear, and concise information about the adoption of such a measure to both employees and their representatives through the appropriate distinctive means. Otherwise, the fundamental right to privacy, enshrined in Article 18 of the Spanish Constitution, would be violated, and failure to comply could result in sanctions for the employer.
The installation of such systems must be proportional to the intended purpose. That is, the employer must evaluate the goal being pursued, the impact it may have on employees’ rights, and the measures adopted to achieve a balance between the motivations for installing these systems and the impact on employees. Ultimately, for the restriction of the fundamental rights of the worker to be legitimate, it must pass a proportionality test based on the appropriateness, necessity, and proportionality of the implemented measure.
The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has ruled on workers’ right to information and how data protection regulations should be followed in these situations. To this end, it is not necessary to obtain the worker’s consent, but it is essential to provide the corresponding information regarding the existence of video surveillance cameras, with a visible sign at the entrances to the surveilled areas being sufficient. This sign should clearly and simply indicate the existence of the monitoring, the identity of the person responsible for the installation of the cameras, as well as information on whom employees can contact to exercise their data protection rights and how to obtain information about the processing of the recorded images. This communication must be carried out even if the cameras are deactivated.
It is worth noting that the format of such a sign is not defined by the regulations, only its content, so there is no standardized model established by the General Data Protection Regulation or by any security body.
Additionally, it must be taken into account that cameras cannot be installed in personal rest areas, changing rooms, or restrooms. It is also not permissible to record private conversations or store images for more than one month after they have been recorded.
All of these requirements will ensure that, for example, in the case of the commission of a criminal offense by an employee, the recorded images can be used to justify dismissal. Failure to comply with these regulations would invalidate the dismissal process, as it would violate the privacy and dignity of the employee.
Although the legal doctrine regarding the admissibility of video surveillance evidence has changed over the years, it is still a matter that generates considerable judicial controversy.
Nevertheless, the way to ensure compliance with the regulations and protect employees’ rights is, without a doubt, to inform them about the presence of cameras.
If you have any questions or doubts regarding video surveillance in the workplace, do not hesitate to contact us. We are here to advise and assist you.
