For small business, monitoring is important- but it’s vital it’s done correctly.
Employers big and small have the right to monitor activities in certain situations at work. Monitoring in the workplace can include recording on CCTV cameras, logging calls and reviewing internet usage among others.
But how do you know your company monitoring is lawful?
Why?
In order to lawfully monitor employees within the workplace there are a number of important considerations that employers must consider, particularly in relation to human rights, data protection and the implementation of policies and procedures.
First, always consider why there is a need to introduce monitoring. This could be for tracking vehicles or for monitoring access to ICT systems. Whatever it is, this must be a legitimate and justifiable business reason.
Who?
Next, identify who within the business should have access to the information and with whom this should be shared. This is crucial from a data protection obligation – especially with the recent introduction of GDPR regulations. The Information Commissions Office (ICO) sets out detailed guidance on Monitoring at Work.
Where?
Internal policies should clearly set out the reasons and benefits for monitoring and any sanctions for misconduct. It is important that your policies are provided to employees from as early as the offer of employment and your expectations are reinforced during both the induction and performance management process.
A privacy impact statement will help guide you through the process. These are also available from the ICO.
Case and point
When monitoring staff, you should also remember Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1988.
Take the the 2017 case of Bãrbulescu v Romania for example.
An engineer for a private company ,Bărbulescu set up a email account in his workplace to deal with customer enquiries. In July 2017 the company identified that he had been emailing his brother and fiancé on personal matters.
He denied this, but was later provided copies of the email discussions. Following an investigation Bărbulescu was dismissed for breaching company policies – a matter of gross misconduct.
His claim for unfair dismissal was rejected by both local courts – and upon appeal in a Chamber vote. However, the European Court of Human Rights’s Grand Chamber subsequently ruled 11 votes to 6 that there was indeed a violation of Article 8.
Bărbulescu, it was ruled, hadn’t been told in enough detail that his messages would be monitored and to what extent. The judgment also noted the failure to give proper consideration as to whether such intrusive monitoring was necessary at all.
The case does not overrule the use of monitoring in the workplace. However, it does send out an important message – monitoring must be done for a clear reason. A one size fits all or blanket approach will likely fail if a legitimate business reason cannot be identified.
Find out more about monitoring or how we can help with your employment & HR needs.