Driver facing cameras in the cab

[MECH-lift]

Omg. I had one, you would not believe the kinda places that little fugger could drive into.

My friend had one we beat the out of it.. man that thing was an off-road machine.

 

[MECH-lift]

Bingo. I keep saying this to people and they don't get it.

Looks like a kia fiat

 

[Ou812fu]

So you think its ok for employees to tamper with company property?
and you don't know me so don't assume that you do.

Tampering would be physically opening or damaging..not to mention most people have probably not even signed a release of pictures or videos being taken of them..

 

[Thebrownblob]

Tampering would be physically opening or damaging..not to mention most people have probably not even signed a release of pictures or videos being taken of them..

Already heard of feeder drivers in trouble for trying to block the camera and they call it tampering, as far as your picture being taken I’m sure something we signed yearly has got some sort of release thrown in there because they’re a bunch of sneaky heads.

 

[Ou812fu]

Already heard of feeder drivers in trouble for trying to block the camera and they call it tampering, as far as your picture being taken I’m sure something we signed yearly has got some sort of release thrown in there because they’re a bunch of sneaky heads.

That is why you never sign anything.

 

[Thebrownblob]

That is why you never sign anything.

Never do, I RTS, but you’re still acknowledging you’ve seen it. Unless it’s DOT required.

 

[Ou812fu]

Already heard of feeder drivers in trouble for trying to block the camera and they call it tampering, as far as your picture being taken I’m sure something we signed yearly has got some sort of release thrown in there because they’re a bunch of sneaky heads.

I believe that the picture/ video release has to be its own paper. You can always ask if you ever signed one..

 

[UnionStrong]

I believe that the picture/ video release has to be its own paper. You can always ask if you ever signed one..

I will bet it doesn’t matter. We’re on camera all day. Implied consent.

 

[Thebrownblob]

I will bet it doesn’t matter. We’re on camera all day. Implied consent.

And there’s lots we don’t sign that we have to do in order to stay employed. As a general rule it’s a good idea for most not to sign their own discipline, simply because they don’t understand what they’re signing, or the time constraints involved. RTS does not absolve you from much of anything if it’s legitimate.

 

[Thebrownblob]

Also don’t like people to sign their own discipline because if they do get in some sort of trouble, there’s always a smart Alec labor manager who wants to say….. “it says right here you signed it, what don’t you understand?” Don’t give them that satisfaction lol.

 

[Ou812fu]

Never do, I RTS, but you’re still acknowledging you’ve seen it. Unless it’s DOT required.

The second part of this is the company openly lied and said the onward one was not a camera. They called it a sensor.the third part is. That management knows that people use the inside of package cars to pee in bottles. It is illegal federally to have a camera pointing at a restroom.

 

[Thebrownblob]

The second part of this is the company openly lied and said the onward one was not a camera. They called it a sensor.the third part is. That management knows that people use the inside of package cars to pee in bottles. It is illegal federally to have a camera pointing at a restroom.

You’re preaching to the choir brother, I just don’t know if any of that will matter will have to find out.

 

[UnionStrong]

And there’s lots we don’t sign that we have to do in order to stay employed. As a general rule it’s a good idea for most not to sign their own discipline, simply because they don’t understand what they’re signing, or the time constraints involved. RTS does not absolve you from much of anything if it’s legitimate.

I always refused to sign. I ain’t admitting to anything.

 

[Ou812fu]

I will bet it doesn’t matter. We’re on camera all day. Implied consent.

A lot of states require that an employer or anyone that has pictures taken by companies have a signed release. The same as recorded conversations. They better of informed you.

 

[UnionStrong]

A lot of states require that an employer or anyone that has pictures taken by companies have a signed release. The same as recorded conversations. They better of informed you.

What states? And what exceptions? If UPS can get away with it, they will. They have legal departments check this stuff out. It’ll be a negotiation point.

 

[Ou812fu]

I hear these are the next best thing to not signing a release to deal with the cameras..

Phantom — Reflectacles Privacy Eyewear & Sunglasses: Anti Facial Recognition Glasses since 2015.

www.reflectacles.com

 

[UnionStrong]

I hear these are the next best thing to not signing a release to deal with the cameras..

Phantom — Reflectacles Privacy Eyewear & Sunglasses: Anti Facial Recognition Glasses since 2015.

www.reflectacles.com

I saw those. Intriguing….

 

[Ou812fu]

Look up the act.

What states? And what exceptions? If UPS can get away with it, they will. They have legal departments check this stuff out. It’ll be a negotiation point.

Generally, employers are not allowed to listen to or record conversations of their employees without the consent of the parties involved. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) allows employers to listen in on business calls, but are not allowed to record or listen to private conversations.

 

[Thebrownblob]

Look up the act.



Generally, employers are not allowed to listen to or record conversations of their employees without the consent of the parties involved. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) allows employers to listen in on business calls, but are not allowed to record or listen to private conversations.

Well we don’t have the cameras where I am so I could not tell you, but I would imagine they will cover their legal bases when it happens.

 

[UnionStrong]

Look up the act.



Generally, employers are not allowed to listen to or record conversations of their employees without the consent of the parties involved. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) allows employers to listen in on business calls, but are not allowed to record or listen to private conversations.

So a sign goes up, “employees on duty may be subject to video and audio recording”. Now what? Quit? The airline pilots are recorded. Safety? I don’t know if they will get away with it, but they’re sure acting like they will.