To make a long story short, I have a project that calls for cameras in elevators. There is some fairly serious and frequent vandalism happening, and they need evidence badly. I am getting a lot of push back from the company's privacy office though saying that cameras in an elevator are an invasion of staff privacy.
If you have dealt with this type of thing in the past, how did you resolve it?
No expectation of privacy in an elevator in general. Is it open to the public or is it a service / freight elevator? What kind of organization?
In past experience, I have resolved this with an explanation of security v. privacy.
As the discussion progresses, keep pushing toward the realization that its easier to explain to employees that the "lack of privacy" outweighs having to discuss a personal violation.
And, my humble opinion, whats the difference in an elevator than the lobby? The hallways? The parking lot? Are those cameras an invasion of privacy?
Its the same conversation when you add a card reader to a door that was previously open. Safety has now out-weighed convenience. In this case, safety has outweighed the 5 seconds of privacy they have between floors.
My initial thought also went to "What are you doing in that elevator you don't want people to see?"
I had a medical research facility that I worked with a few years back that expressed the same concerns and wouldn't go along with my recommendations to install cameras in the elevators.
The group that I was working with stated that the elevators provided a brief moment where an employee could adjust their clothing, pick their nose, or scratch an itch (presumably if they were alone in the elevator) and didn't want cameras to invade upon this moment. I was a little surprised at this concern but decided to back-off considering how strongly they felt about it.
The group that I was working with stated that the elevators provided a brief moment where an employee could adjust their clothing, pick their nose, or scratch an itch (presumably if they were alone in the elevator) and didn't want cameras to invade upon this moment.
Wow. I don’t think I’ve ever done anything alone in an elevator where I’d be embarrassed by the video. Thank God there’s no audio though! ;)
Elevators are by definition methods to move people from one place to another. In the IBC and most State codes, they are governed by the same rules and regulations as public escalators or moving walkways. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public thoroughfare. Having said that, the company is allowed to have a policy, just not a law or code.
If I were on that security team or their insurance company, the privacy office would have to prove their case or the money for the repairs would come from their budget. The building code and common sense would support cameras.
Good Luck on this one.
First, offer to add "video surveillance" signs outside and inside the elevator(s).
Second, similar to Jeff K's comment, all depend how it's sold to the organization.
The company I work for is psudo-gov't with 8 unions. To get something like this through, you need to establish trust that it's a passive camera and viewed when required (unless you're trying to catch people in the act).
Specifically, use the position that it'll be used for life-safety (check on well-being of persons if trapped) or post-incident investigations (see who vandalized). You're also setting the stage to protect the company and employees in a harassment claim. Female employee says in appropriate advances were made, pull the tape to find out and save a lawsuit for dismassal without cause.
Essentially, when dealing with privacy and employee groups, reassure them it's for their benefit, you're not trying to hide anything and explain "we've got better things to do the watch people ride elevators".
Vandalism aside, if something happens, they'll be happy it was there.
Elevators are viewed as public domain here and in public domain the expectation of privacy is reduced or none existent so cameras are permissible.
Have you considered a Geutebrück's motion privacy features?
Geutebrück has a unique feature built into their G-Core VMS known as motion privacy. It can be set to pixelate areas or just people in any given area, including the cab of an elevator. The level and intensity of the pixelation can be adjusted so Security Personnel who monitor elevators (live and/or recorded video) can see that there are people entering riding and exiting the elevators but, their identity and personal features would be privacy protected.
In the event of vandalism or a more serious crime, the security personnel could see that occurring and upon request and authorization, the actual un-pixelated video can be "accessed" by a high level manager. Or, accessing un-pixelated video could require a two-person login.
In addition to elevators, the uses for Geutebrück's motion pixilation feature is used in union labor facilities where worker privacy concerns have previously restricted the use of video cameras for security and safety. It is also being used in Prisons where it has has been officially approved as PREA Compliant, allowing cameras to be installed in areas of these facilities where they were prohibited in the past.
So when privacy concerns trump safety and security requirements, this is a feature you might want to consider!
Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.
