Cab Cams, It's time article 8 and CCTV laws are updated

With the government’s sinister snooper laws, and human rights record in the UK slipping (Julian Assange, say no more) it’s no wonder companies look at what the government gets away with, and start installing cameras to observe drivers.

Now before any transport staff, managers, trainers, and other advocates start to run my post down, i would like to make a point.

Yes, I understand that with all the dodgy drivers that have flooded the labour market over the last few years has driven companies to take tougher measures to improve road safety, I get that, I understand the logic.

But my point is the dignity aspect of this. Yes I know that government agencies can override our human rights, with a scribble of some bureaucrat. And we all know how ethical bureaucrats are. cough cough what with the fantastic oversight we have in this country cough cough.

But my point is this. In article 8 of the human rights law (really to me it’s not worth the paper it’s written on) It states that a person can have their human rights violated if there is intrusion by public authority at a place in your home of expected privacy.

i.e. a repair man from the council came to your home, and was clearing the guttering and looked in the window and see’s your other half having a shower, that is good grounds to use this legislation, unless he was shocked at the horrible sight, fell of the ladder and wished for a quick death as he tumbled to the ground.

Any way, the point is this: Pay attention now: A drivers cab is a place a driver can spend many hours a day, sometimes 12 or more hours on his or her own. during that time, a driver may feel relaxed and comfortable, to the point a song comes on the radio, and as humans we all take the opportunity to have a little warble when behind the wheel, or we may think out loud, by talking to ourselves (hey I’m on the road alone for many hours) anyway my point is, that there should be a certain level of expected dignity.

There should be under CCTV laws a guidance for companies to follow to ensure driver dignity, and that if a driver finds out that transport staff have been laughing at the driver for a clip or audio of the driver saying, or singing, over breaking down, in frustration when stuck in a traffic jam for hours, that the driver should have rights to seek compensation.

It’s high time the government started to rebuild trust with it’s citizens and overhaul CCTV laws for companies, and update article 8 of the human rights laws, to ensure that not just anyone at a company is allowed to know of preview your activity while driving, as it could be embarrassing, and violating trust and causes worry, paranoia amongst drivers, and defiantly lowers morale.

As an agency driver (yes I know, apparently agency drivers can’t hold down a regular job, blah blah blah) I see these cameras appearing in companies, and the effect is defiantly not a morale booster.

Drivers are quite rattled by the intrusion, not so much worried about their conduct as a professional driver, more so, on the dignity, privacy aspect, and concern that the gossip machine will go into overdrive at their ringing a cat’s neck while behind the wheel.

Your thoughts, and please don’t respond if you are going to take an easy shot at me, don’t be a sad sack, this is definitely a major concern for drivers dignity.

If you are a manager for a company, and want to reply, I would like to first say, how would you feel if the company put a camera in your company car, or in their sales staffs car, and that this country’s laws have not kept up with not only government intrusion, but corporate intrusion into citizens right to privacy and dignity.

I’m surprised there is no follow-up comments. No wonder corporations are treating us this way. We don’t protest, we just shrug, and get on with it. Sad.

When your at Lymn truckstop there’s CCTV and a huge TV screen as.you go into the gents. And you can see yourself.going in there.
I don’t really get the point in that.
And surely it has to be a breach of your human rights breach of.privacy.
And same.could be said of the Amazon ring video door bells.
And don’t forget the face recognition cameras that were used briefly in places
.
Big brother is watching and tracking us.

But we’re british we just shrug our shoulders and get on with it.
Can’t see the frech putting up with it all

Tonyshortstraw:
I’m surprised there is no follow-up comments. No wonder corporations are treating us this way. We don’t protest, we just shrug, and get on with it. Sad.

Mate,…I’m with you 101% I feel very strongly about this sort of intrusion, I have an insurance type camera, which only goes off in sharp braking or other potential accident events, that type is bad enough, and the thin end of the wedge, I strongly disapprove of it…(even though it’s for MY benefit apparentlly, :unamused: .and not there to catch me out at all…aye right. :unamused:

Thing is mate, it’s pointless me even going any further with this…we’d simply be ■■■■■■■ against the wind, it’ll achieve Jack ■■■■.! :bulb:

Attitudes such as…
If you’re doing nothing wrong,.what’s the problem.

There are cameras everywhere now, what’s the difference.

It doesn’t really bother me, you get used to it.

The way the job is going, what can you do.

And other arse lubing pathetic ■■■■ comments which will appear on this thread.

So basically mate unless we all stick together and say enough is enough… :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: (my sides are splitting,) we’re stuck with it… :bulb:

Synopsis, to sum up in one sentence…They can (and do) whatever the ■■■■ they like. :bulb:

We have dash cam and side cameras which to me aren’t a great concern and yes obviously in an accident they can be used for or against you, again no great issue with that. If you make a mistake you should be big enough to acknowledge it in my opinion.
As for driver facing cams that’s another thing entirely, I would find that wholly unacceptable and a total invasion of privacy. Not only is it our workplace, for a great many of us it’s our home away from home and really shouldn’t be intruded upon. As far as I know there are no plans to install these in our fleet but you never know :unamused:

Tonyshortstraw:
I’m surprised there is no follow-up comments.

  1. It was written at 3am on a week when many of us are off work and really we have better things to be doing if up then.

  2. Its been done soooo many times that a lot of us don’t bother repeating the same as we already did on our views. However to deal with your specific points…

  3. Within all that waffle you could basically have said the Human Rights Act could be used if updated to legislate in driver facing cameras. Why not a specific law stating the use of work based cameras rather than a vauge law that requires courts and high courts to decide what applies.

  4. We can’t change the act until at least January and doubt it will be top priority. EU said we can’t.

  5. I dont like the idea (don’t think I’d drive for a company who installed them) and in theory data protection laws already stipulates who can access them, so no major need for new laws. Its just getting the data commissioner to actually take notice which is the harder bit.

Finally, a lot of company cars now have them for the same insurance reasons. Best of course if they can only be accessed from the SD card not remotely.

Simples … Just remember not to ■■■■■■■■■■ while on a night out

peirre:
Simples … Just remember not to ■■■■■■■■■■ while on a night out

What else am I supposed to do for 5mins. :smiley:

If you are performing in front of a camera, should the company pay for a PRS licence, does a white van man with his mate require a licence to listen to the radio, 2 blokes in a shop do!

peirre:
Simples … Just remember not to ■■■■■■■■■■ while on a night out

Or do, if you’re an exhibitionist

Tonyshortstraw:
With the government’s sinister snooper laws, and human rights record in the UK slipping (Julian Assange, say no more) it’s no wonder companies look at what the government gets away with, and start installing cameras to observe drivers.

Now before any transport staff, managers, trainers, and other advocates start to run my post down, i would like to make a point.

Yes, I understand that with all the dodgy drivers that have flooded the labour market over the last few years has driven companies to take tougher measures to improve road safety, I get that, I understand the logic.

But my point is the dignity aspect of this. Yes I know that government agencies can override our human rights, with a scribble of some bureaucrat. And we all know how ethical bureaucrats are. cough cough what with the fantastic oversight we have in this country cough cough.

But my point is this. In article 8 of the human rights law (really to me it’s not worth the paper it’s written on) It states that a person can have their human rights violated if there is intrusion by public authority at a place in your home of expected privacy.

i.e. a repair man from the council came to your home, and was clearing the guttering and looked in the window and see’s your other half having a shower, that is good grounds to use this legislation, unless he was shocked at the horrible sight, fell of the ladder and wished for a quick death as he tumbled to the ground.

Any way, the point is this: Pay attention now: A drivers cab is a place a driver can spend many hours a day, sometimes 12 or more hours on his or her own. during that time, a driver may feel relaxed and comfortable, to the point a song comes on the radio, and as humans we all take the opportunity to have a little warble when behind the wheel, or we may think out loud, by talking to ourselves (hey I’m on the road alone for many hours) anyway my point is, that there should be a certain level of expected dignity.
There should be under CCTV laws a guidance for companies to follow to ensure driver dignity, and that if a driver finds out that transport staff have been laughing at the driver for a clip or audio of the driver saying, or singing, over breaking down, in frustration when stuck in a traffic jam for hours, that the driver should have rights to seek compensation.

It’s high time the government started to rebuild trust with it’s citizens and overhaul CCTV laws for companies, and update article 8 of the human rights laws, to ensure that not just anyone at a company is allowed to know of preview your activity while driving, as it could be embarrassing, and violating trust and causes worry, paranoia amongst drivers, and defiantly lowers morale.

As an agency driver (yes I know, apparently agency drivers can’t hold down a regular job, blah blah blah) I see these cameras appearing in companies, and the effect is defiantly not a morale booster.

Drivers are quite rattled by the intrusion, not so much worried about their conduct as a professional driver, more so, on the dignity, privacy aspect, and concern that the gossip machine will go into overdrive at their ringing a cat’s neck while behind the wheel.

Your thoughts, and please don’t respond if you are going to take an easy shot at me, don’t be a sad sack, this is definitely a major concern for drivers dignity.

If you are a manager for a company, and want to reply, I would like to first say, how would you feel if the company put a camera in your company car, or in their sales staffs car, and that this country’s laws have not kept up with not only government intrusion, but corporate intrusion into citizens right to privacy and dignity.

Problem sorted.

Proper unionised workforces haven’t accepted them, and they arn’t fitted, in some cases the company fitted them before consulation, lorries didn’t leave the yard, in cab cameras removed and stayed removed, other union sites pre empted things by telling the company don’t even think about it.
Put as many round the outside as you like, protects the driver as well as the company.

Unions are terrible, don’t join one :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :wink:

Juddian:
Proper unionised workforces haven’t accepted them, and they arn’t fitted, in some cases the company fitted them before consulation, lorries didn’t leave the yard, in cab cameras removed and stayed removed

And then you woke up. Perhaps you can point me to an article where they reported on your imaginary events. I’m sure that a union would be bleating about it to anyone who’d listen.

Here’s a scenario. Drives have had in cab cameras for a few years is becoming the norm.
But say Mr stobarat. Mr tuner or Mr FedEx. Etc decided to install cameras in there transport offices one on each pc to monitor his workforce. Do you think thed just accept it?

And personally I think they should do.
productivity might improve then. Instead of us being ignored while there on Facebook etc.

Conor:

Juddian:
Proper unionised workforces haven’t accepted them, and they arn’t fitted, in some cases the company fitted them before consulation, lorries didn’t leave the yard, in cab cameras removed and stayed removed

And then you woke up. Perhaps you can point me to an article where they reported on your imaginary events. I’m sure that a union would be bleating about it to anyone who’d listen.

George Allinson Transport Darlo.
Ok, I can’t verify it’s authenticity, but I’ve heard it many times quoted in the North East, and I’m sure somebody on here will either verify it, or refute it as drivercrap.
Story goes,.drivers turned up for work Mon am, found incident type cameras facing both ways fitted with no consultation, none of them left the yard until they were taken out, but firm compromised to promise to remove them next weekend, and then did so and replaced them with forward facing camera only,.which none of the drivers had a problem with.

Conor:

Juddian:
Proper unionised workforces haven’t accepted them, and they arn’t fitted, in some cases the company fitted them before consulation, lorries didn’t leave the yard, in cab cameras removed and stayed removed

And then you woke up. Perhaps you can point me to an article where they reported on your imaginary events. I’m sure that a union would be bleating about it to anyone who’d listen.

:unamused: its called discretion, an aid to future negotiations.

Apparently my employer had it out with the union over this and lost. Instead they installed cameras on the wing mirrors of some trucks which can see into the cab. I actively avoid those trucks as one cannot even take a sip of one’s water at the traffic lights according to company policy.

Conor:

Juddian:
Proper unionised workforces haven’t accepted them, and they arn’t fitted, in some cases the company fitted them before consulation, lorries didn’t leave the yard, in cab cameras removed and stayed removed

And then you woke up. Perhaps you can point me to an article where they reported on your imaginary events. I’m sure that a union would be bleating about it to anyone who’d listen.

Asda tried to do it with the home shopping noddy vans in 2018, GMB nixed it. Cant find the link but Im pretty sure it was Wincanton for Asda in Donny ordered new wagons with in cab cams that never went out until they were removed on instruction from the GMB. They keep trying every so often and the union shoot them down.

I spoke with a fellow driver. He claimed that he was ejected from a company that is using cab cams because he refused to wear a seat belt.

He claims he got 2 warnings, and on the 3rd time he was told to move on. He claimed that at no point did he trigger the cab cams. He believes that the company were snooping on him.

I also went for an assessment twice at a different company that uses isotrac tablets. The first time I did the assessment, they just installed isotrac tablet, the trainer said the tablet also has a built-in camera (like most tablets do) and that it is possible to see and hear what is going on inside the cab.

A few years later i had to do an assessment at the same company. This time the trainer made no reference to the camera inside the tablet. The point is, that companies now realize that cab cams make drivers uneasy. So now they don’t even let you know they can watch you at any time.

That to me is a breach of ICO law, or should be, or should be. There should be strengthening of CCTV laws for companies to ensure they let people know there is a camera trained on them.

Tonyshortstraw:
I spoke with a fellow driver. He claimed that he was ejected from a company that is using cab cams because he refused to wear a seat belt.

He claims he got 2 warnings, and on the 3rd time he was told to move on. He claimed that at no point did he trigger the cab cams. He believes that the company were snooping on him…

I guess the guys an idiot, he was warned to wear his seatbelt not once but twice. It wasn’t the cameras that lost his job, it was his own stupid arrogance