Is This Legal?

[hotlips11]

Hi All, My friend works in a residential home for the elderly. There are CCTV cameras installed and she's been told they are connected to the owners phone. ( the home is in Devon and owner lives in London) Every thing in the home is done to a time schedule. If you take too long with a resident when assisting with personal care when he comes down to Devon (he comes down on weekly basis) he will wait outside a residents bedroom without the staffs knowledge and time them. If he still thinks you have been too long then you are dismissed!!! The cameras aren't in the residents bedrooms only communal areas, corridors, kitchen, laundry etc. I'm curious to know this too and would you say it was legal for him to have cameras connected to his phone?? Many thanks in advance if anyone can shed any light on this.

[fiction-factory]

Putting to one side the secondary issue about timing staff, the question seems to be about whether it's legal for the owner to be able to view what's going on at the home. From a non-legal point of view it seems to me to be a good idea that the owner is able to keep an eye on things remotely so I would be surprised if it was illegal per se. There may be something in the agreement for residents about CCTV arrangements

[Cloverjo]

What an awful man! It's probably legal for him to have the cameras outside residents' rooms, but it doesn't seem fair to sack a carefor taking too long with over looking after someone.
Unfair dismissal is what comes to mind.

[Dogsbody2]

There are legal requirements a business owner must follow to be using CCTV in the workplace. See here https://www.gov.uk/data-protection-your-business/using-cctv

[EDDIE51]

I would be far more concerned about the staff being forced to limit the time spent helping the residents, than the cameras themselves. The owner can not know why it takes longer than normal to help a resident.

[TWR]

If I working in this home I would, with other staff have a word quietly with the residents relatives & inform them that you are not spending enough time with their relatives care, are you putting your job on the line? I will let you decide that, but that's the way I would go.

[Zacs-Master]

If you do as TWR suggests you'll really be putting your job on the line as the relatives will go straight to the bosses. V bad idea.

[TWR]

Relatives care in my eyes comes before profit in owners pocket Zac, always has been.

[TWR]

That should have been Residents

[Cloverjo]

Twr, I agree that's the way it should be. Why is this horrible owner of the home spying on carers to check they're not spending too long caring?
Zacs, why would the relatives go to the bosses to put a carer's job at risk? Any carer who made this public should be applauded by anyone who has a relative in this home.

[Zacs-Master]

'Why would the relatives go to the bosses'

Well, I for one would make that my immediate course of action if a carer told me they weren't spending enough time with someone I loved. Of course relatives come first TWR but I think your suggested course of action would lead to almost instant dismissal.

[TWR]

Zac, with respect, when I done the Job, I put the Service users first, them my job, without the services users I would not have a job, two residents have totally different needs, my answer to the owner, you can put the camera where the sun does not shine.

[Zacs-Master]

Why did you stop doing the job TWR?

[TWR]

Long Story Zac, I worked with an EVIL LYING ***, I will leave it at that.

[Zacs-Master]

Ah I see. Well, I suppose you can only put the residents care first for so long.

[Peter Pedant]

Good to see Dogz fetting best answer
spot on as usual

the usual suspects have divided employment practices from the CCTV side which is governed by the advice and blah blah on the ICO site

here is a case I won earlier - in another case the Trust had been listening to the staffs tele calls WITHOUT notice

and here every one knows

very likely to be legal

ICO is very helpful if you ring them

as for the employment bit - I am not sure
but you seem not be suggesting that it is unlawful
jjust how awful they are

[Peter Pedant]

oops the case

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2015/1043248/fs_50561958.pdf

sozza

[Dogsbody2]

The question was asked in legal, so a legal answer was provided.
By my reckoning Dogz didn't get the best answer, PP, but thanks for the thought.
Although a relatively new member, it strikes me that Answerbank members are good on emotion and short on facts. Hence the best answer is an emotional one.
The number of members qualified to provide decent answers to the legal questions seems to number less than a dozen. Depressing.

[Peter Pedant]

Dont be depressed doggo

It is the price paid for an anonymised site
it is the same at work when someone says "I know the answer to this" and they dont

There are professionals whom we are all grateful to in that they give their highly valued advice for free. Barmaid, BC and yourself to name three

Poor Barmaid nearly went into chancery nuclear melt down when someone asked her if she knew what she was talking about

Nearly happened to me at a drugstore this morning
where the sales assistance was bullshotting about the over the counter sale of codeine - still it livened an otherwise quiet day