Hgv Dash-Cams

[woodchopper]

The company I work for has fitted Dash-cams to its vehicles.
They record on a continuous loop and should the “system” detect any event such as harsh braking, hitting a large pothole running over a kerb it will send the last 10 seconds and next 10 seconds for review by management.
If during one of these events – should the driver not be wearing a seatbelt, can that footage be used against him in disciplinary procedure even thought the failure to wear a seatbelt didn’t trigger the system?
Legal opinions would be welcome please.

[Baldric]

If the Dash-cam is looking out the front of the vehicle how will it show if the driver is wearing a seat belt, or not?

[ubasses]

The dash cam in my car only records what is ahead of the car, so unless you have one facing into the cab I cannot see how it would pick up if you are wearing a seat belt or not. Though, I must say I think you would be stupid not to be wearing one.

[alavahalf]

Why would you not wear a seatbelt ?

[Buenchico]

ANY reliable information relating to a breach of an employer's rules (such as the boss's wife spotting a company driver not wearing a seatbelt) can be sufficient to trigger disciplinary proceedings against an employee.

So the answer to your question is clearly 'Yes'.

[alavahalf]

... and make sure the bosses wife does'nt appear on the cam either !

[Peter Pedant]

why shouldnt it be ? used against him ( or for him )

so the answer is clearly yes

why do you think this is a question of law rather than say - common sense ?

[woodchopper]

Dash cam observes driver as well and has audio too - nothing to do with me - a fellow colleague is in the quagmire.

[woodchopper]

Was thinking more in the line of privacy aspect.

[Baldric]

Never come across one with two camera but I'm always willing to learn, do you have an example please?

[Peter Pedant]

tell your fren' to get into contact with a union
he is allowed to take a union rep or another worker into any empoyers enquiry and ACAS say the results of doing this are much better whatever

data such as this is admissible in the more informal atmosphere of an employers inquiry

[ also if your fren did X and feels that his best defence is to try to get the photo of him doing X excluded ... do you really want to do him and yourself a favour by supporting him ? ]

[Peter Pedant]

// I wouldn't put up with that.//db

the police may well have to as a result of some spectacular recent mismatches between what they said happened and what on lookers recorded ( some whilst being told not to record )

in a hospital, one sided recording ( by the patient or relatives ) is a fact of life

[woofgang]

I think from experience of NHS disciplinaries, that a) if the company decide to put dashcams and driver cams in their vehicles, then they have the right to do so and the employee has the right to leave. They have a duty to ensure that the recordings are kept securely so that the employee’s data protection rights are not breached eg the recordings don’t end up on “Britain’s Most Stupid Drivers but a apart from that they have a right to monitor employees while they are at work.
b) If a breach of company T and C (or the law) happens then how that breach is discovered is not relevant. In a case I was involved in, evidence of continued fraudulent signing in and out was used as evidence to discipline an employee. The evidence was actually the fire safety record but it could still be used even though the offence was theft of company time and not related to safety.

But...I mean....come on....he knows there is a cam in the cab trained on him and he fails to use his seatbelt? as PP has kind of said....do you really want to ally yourself with an idiot?

[Peter Pedant]

o legal point db

yes of course I agree with a fella doesnt have to incriminate himself....
it is in the Human Rights Act - a hate object for all right thinking people - but there is civil case law that straightforwardly says that wood choppers case is not ... criminal and so is not incrimination

it is an employment case
also occurs in medical regulation where the doctor has to fess up against himself as it is a regulation case and not criminal ( and decided on the balance of probabilities )

ho hum, dee-bee there is a lot of injustice out there in the world ....

[Hopkirk]

If they put a camera on me in my cab, then I will stick a post it note over it before I drive off. (I do wear my seat belt though)