spy cameras?

[UnconTROLLed]

Management's line will be the personal safety nonsense.

I like the idea of the cameras. No more cover drivers riding around with smalls on the dash in neigboroods, flinging VSDs and etc up to front doors instead of making the stop and drop, which takes another minute or two

 

[soberups]

I like the idea of the cameras. No more cover drivers riding around with smalls on the dash in neigboroods, flinging VSDs and etc up to front doors instead of making the stop and drop, which takes another minute or two

That would only be the case if the drivers is question were aware of the cameras and altered their behavior accordingly.

Hidden cameras, if allowed, would be selectively used to target certain "special" drivers... meaning the overallowed ones. Those who made their management look good on paper would find their transgressions being conveniently ignored.

Im not entirely opposed to the concept of cameras in the cars, but the process needs to be transparent and the driver needs to be able to turn off or cover the camera in the package compartment for privacy reasons when needed.

Either everybody gets the cameras...and knows about them ahead of time....or nobody gets the cameras.

 

[over9five]

Where's that lawyer who posted here for a while. I forget his name, but I liked him and would love to hear his thoughts.

 

[Jones]

Can employers use video monitoring in the workplace?

For the most part, yes. Video monitoring is a commonplace method of deterring theft, maintaining security and monitoring employees. For example, a bank may utilize video monitoring to prevent or collect evidence on a robbery. A company may also use video monitoring in a parking garage as a security measure for employee safety.
Employers may also use cameras to monitor employee productivity and prevent internal theft. Currently, federal law does not prevent video monitoring even when the employee does not know or consent to being monitored.


Are there situations where an employer cannot use video cameras?


In some instances, courts have upheld employee privacy. Specifically, courts have sided with employee privacy in instances where the monitoring has been physically invasive, such as hidden cameras in a locker room or bathroom. See National Workrights Institute’s Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace: Common Law & Federal Statutory Protection for a more in-depth discussion.
There are some state laws (such as Connecticut’s Gen Stat 31-48b) that have restrictions on where, how and why an employer may videotape employees.
Labor unions may negotiate limitations on video recordings of unionized workers. In 1997, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that surveillance was subject to mandatory bargaining, meaning a union must agree to any monitoring of unionized workers. This includes the use of hidden cameras. Read the National Labor Relations Board Advice Memorandum on this case. Union members should speak with a union representative if they have concerns about workplace video monitoring.​

source

 

[Anonymous 10]

Hope they like watching me piss in a bottle. There is very limited access to bathrooms on most of the rural routes I know.

I hope you don't have to do a #2 back there or they might get to see something that looks like a brown rod.

 

[browndevil]

now if these cameras were facing outward, then they would have excellent video of the real challenges all drivers face daily,

...or underneath the package car, because now they want us to walk around the PC and do a quick visual looking for kids as we come back from a stop

 

[Babagounj]

For only $19.99 get the complete set of Undercover Brown Dvds.
See what really goes on behind those closed doors.
See the joys, see the mess and watch how the stress levels rise, watch them eat their boxed lunches, sleep on the shelves, talk on the cell phones, ...and more.

 

[MC4YOU2]

Here is a link to an earlier discussion of exactly this possibility, and some thoughts from both sides.

http://www.browncafe.com/forum/f39/technology-rumor-297649/

 

[Channahon]

When I retired from UPS a few years ago, if a camera was to be installed for video survelliance regarding theft issues, the company would advise the Union that a camera was going to be used. However, the specifics were not disclosed, just a vague location. Such as within the district, or a large building.

 

[iowa boy]

"Labor unions may negotiate limitations on video recordings of unionized workers. In 1997, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that surveillance was subject to mandatory bargaining, meaning a union must agree to any monitoring of unionized workers. This includes the use of hidden cameras. Read the National Labor Relations Board Advice Memorandum on this case. Union members should speak with a union representative if they have concerns about workplace video monitoring."

This is a very interesting paragraph within 'Jones' post (#24) above. Any of the stewards catch this? I'm not a steward and this is a very interesting piece of information.

 

[p228]

So, how many actually checked their package cars for cameras?

 

[brownmonster]

I did. looks clean.

 

[j4ck4zz]

My loader was busted for theft a few years ago with one of these cameras. I was told the camera was in there. The "pelican" waterproof box in the battery compartment is what you need to look for.

 

[over9five]

So, how many actually checked their package cars for cameras?

And more importantly, who found some?

 

[EmerCond421]

So, how many actually checked their package cars for cameras?

I checked; didn't find anything.

 

[dilligaf]

All kidding aside...if they are going to put cameras in the package cars they should be required to notify the employee that they are being recorded.

There is a reasonable expectation of privacy inside of a package car. We burp in there. We fart in there. We scratch our nuts back there and we pull out our wedgies and adjust our boxers or our bra straps, depending on gender. Sometimes we pee in bottles back there. I am sure there are female drivers who have had to use feminine hygiene products back there when no bathrooms were available.

Its UPS's truck and they have the right to install whatever monitoring equipment they wish to, but we have a right to know when we are being spied upon in an area where we rightfully expect some level of privacy.

I would love to hear some followup on this one. What was the company's justification for this action, and is this something that they have a right to do without any probable cause?

I agree Sober! BTDT. If I found out that I was being video'd in the back of the truck and was not informed of such I would be pissed. My willingness to save a few miles to go to the bathroom would end, post haste.

 

[pretzel_man]

You will not find a single driver who has been disciplined due to a camera on a package car.
You will not find a single management person who has seen a video from a camera in a package car (small exception below).

This is because there are no spy cameras on package cars.

Here is what I know....
A few years ago, a car or two were fitted with cameras. This was done with the knowledge of the union and driver(s). The intent was to look for reasons of overallowed. There was a promise that no discipline would come from the analysis no matter what was seen.

The study was conducted and completed.

There are a few vehicles equipped with technology to gather data for outside companies as a pilot. The thought is that our package cars can passively gather data that other companies would pay for. Think of traffic for instance.

As I look at the pictures, its hard to tell what was seen. If it were a camera, doesn't it look like its facing away from the driver and out the window? Maybe we are testing gathering data for Google StreetView?

The spy cameras are just not there.

P-Man

 

[COSMOS]

The cameras in the pictures were hidden behind holes drilled to accomodate the lens of the camera. One was pointed at the driver in the cab. The other was in the cargo bay above the bulkhead door. The driver pulled them out of their hiding places to take pictures of them.

 

[j4ck4zz]

From my experience with the camera, I think LP needs a very good reason to put one in the package car. The average employee that's doing the job right doesn't have much to worry about.

 

[hellfire]

fake