Latvia: DPA publishes new guide on employee video surveillance

In a nutshell, Data Protection authority (hereafter – DPA) provides that companies may conduct video surveillance:

The DPA has provided clarifications on the use of video surveillance of employees in the course of their work, which is complex and controversial and requires a separate explanation. It is essential that if audio recording is accompanied by video recording then a separate purpose and that an additional balancing of interests must be carried out on the impact of the audio recording on the employee (or client).

The basic requirements that the employer should consider before installing CCTV system are:

In essence, there are three main situations in which an employer may need to carry out video surveillance of employees in the course of their on-site duties.

The purpose for which the processing is carried out for the purpose of implementing a legislative or regulatory act must be determined in accordance with the delegation of power set out in the legislative or regulatory act. For example, as stipulated by the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 662 "Procedure for Circulation of Excisable Goods"  dated August 30, 2005, transparency shall be ensured of the place of dispensing of alcoholic beverages, produced alcohol or tobacco products, which may include, inter alia, supervision of the performance of duties by employees.

In this case, the legal basis for the video surveillance under the Data Regulation will be the fulfilment of a legal obligation attributable to the employer. CCTV is appropriately carried out at the designated place of production or dispensing of excise goods. The information is used only for the purpose of policing the movement of excise goods, but CCTV in the employees' lounge would be considered inappropriate.

In this case the stated purpose must specify precisely which possible disputes the envisaged processing may be used to resolve. 

For example, in cases where increased risks of corruption or the influenceability of staff members are identified, video surveillance may be carried out, which would be used if, following a request from a natural person or a competent authority, the legality of the conduct of a staff member in a particular situation should be assessed.

Video surveillance in this context will apply, for example, where there is a higher risk of a direct dispute between the customer and the employee, which may have civil consequences for the employer, such as at the checkout, or where the employee is entrusted with providing the customer with information that is later relevant to the performance of the subject matter of the contract (including, for example, demonstrating the characteristics of the goods or services before the contract is concluded).

In such cases employers can rely on the legitimate interest ground set out in the Data Regulation.

Appropriate CCTV would be the taking of video surveillance in the cashier's area to record whether the employee is giving the correct change to the customer. Inappropriate CCTV would be the surveillance of telephone advisers, as the recording would be practically useless to resolve a dispute arising from potentially inappropriate advice.

In this case the purpose must be defined in terms of which work or process quality control measures may be used for the planned processing of information. 

Video surveillance in this situation will be applicable, for example, where it is necessary to monitor the timely performance of certain activities, e.g. to ensure the sustainability of production.

In such cases employers can rely on the legitimate interest ground set out in the Data Regulation.

Appropriate video surveillance would be to temporarily observe a particular section of a production line to ensure that the work being carried out there is being carried out as planned, in order to prevent interruptions in the production of the final product, or damage to the production machinery. 

Observation of this production stage may also involve recording/observing the performance of a specific task by an employee. Inappropriate video surveillance would be to observe the entire process rather than the performance of a specific activity relevant to the production process. 

For this purpose, for example, the packaging of the final product and its delivery to the warehouse would no longer be proportionate.