Video surveillance of employees in Serbia: a guide for employers

The need for security – of data, property, people – has led employers to increasingly install video surveillance in their business premises. However, recording employees is not only a technical, but also a legal issue.
Video surveillance of employees directly touches on the right to privacy and the rules on personal data protection. The Law on Personal Data Protection (ZZPL) recognises video surveillance as a form of data processing. If it is not carried out in accordance with the law, the employer may bear serious consequences.
Below we provide answers to the most common questions employers have regarding video surveillance of employees in Serbia.

1. Is video surveillance of employees allowed at all?

Yes, video surveillance of employees is allowed, but only under certain conditions.
Namely, there is no specific regulation that governs video surveillance of business premises; rather, conclusions are drawn from the Law on Personal Data Protection and comparative practice.

The basic principle is that the employer must have a legitimate interest for installing cameras. In each specific case it is necessary to assess what constitutes a legitimate interest. This means there must be a real need to monitor a certain part of the premises in order to protect persons, property, trade secrets or safety. At the same time, that employer’s interest must not violate the dignity, privacy and other rights of employees.

Video surveillance must be:

• proportionate to the goal to be achieved – the need for security justifies intrusion into employees’ privacy to the necessary, minimal extent (e.g., the counter is monitored, but not the room where employees leave their coats)

• limited only to the necessary parts of the premises – under no circumstances should areas that merely violate privacy and are not relevant to the purpose of protection be monitored (for example, toilets, kitchenette, etc.)

• announced in advance and clearly marked – it is necessary to indicate that a certain area is under video surveillance, but more detailed information for employees is also required

2. What are legitimate reasons for video surveillance?

According to the practice and interpretation of the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, legitimate reasons may include:

• Protection of property and valuable equipment (e.g., monitoring of entrances, cash registers, servers)

• Safety of employees and visitors (especially in areas with a high flow of people)

• Access control to rooms with confidential data (e.g., archives, IT departments)

• Prevention of accidents in high-risk working environments (e.g., plants, warehouses)
  However, surveillance for the purpose of monitoring employees’ efficiency, their behaviour or presence at work is not permitted. Such surveillance is considered an intrusion into privacy and undermines workers’ dignity.

3. What must an employer do before introducing video surveillance?

        Before introducing video surveillance, the employer has several obligations:

• Assessment of justification: a so-called balancing of interests test must be carried out to assess whether video surveillance is truly necessary and whether there is a less intrusive measure that can achieve the same objective.

• Adoption of a Risk Assessment for the protection of persons, property and operations prepared in accordance with the Law on Private Security.

• Informing employees: employees must be informed about the existence of surveillance, the legal basis, purpose, retention period of recordings and the rights they have.

• Marking the premises: areas under surveillance must be clearly marked with stickers/camera symbols and appropriate text.
  If necessary, it is advisable to obtain the opinion of the Commissioner, especially in the case of complex surveillance systems.

4. Is employees’ consent required for video surveillance?

This question cannot be answered simply in the negative or the affirmative.

As noted above, there is no specific regulation governing video surveillance, so answers to many questions must be sought in existing laws. Thus, employees’ consent for video surveillance of business premises is nowhere defined as an obligation for the employer, especially if the employer has a legitimate interest in introducing video surveillance.

However, the Labour Law emphasises the protection of the employee’s dignity and personal integrity, as well as the employer’s duty to inform the employee about working conditions. In line with these provisions, the employer should inform the employee about video surveillance and seek his or her consent.

The dilemma, however, is whether an employer who does not obtain an employee’s consent will in any case proceed with video surveillance.

That, of course, depends on the employer itself. But the assumption is that the employer will rely on its legitimate interest and, after conducting a balancing test showing that surveillance is necessary and justified, will in any case introduce video surveillance.

On the other hand, if the employer cannot prove that there is a legitimate interest for video surveillance, even the employee’s consent will not “legalise” unlawful surveillance.

5. Which parts of the workplace can be recorded?

Video surveillance is justified only in those areas for which there is a real need for security and protection.
For example:

• Permitted monitoring: entrances and exits, corridors, warehouses, the area around cash registers, public areas

• Prohibited monitoring: toilets, changing rooms, break rooms, kitchens, rest areas

• Cameras should not be installed in rooms where employees have a justified and reasonable expectation of privacy and where there is no reason for monitoring other than measuring their productivity. Employers must devise methods for checking productivity that do not involve processing personal data.

• In addition, even when an area is legitimately monitored, the angle and equipment should be chosen to record as few individuals as possible, only to the extent necessary.

6. How long may recordings be retained?

The Law on Personal Data Protection does not prescribe an exact retention period for video-surveillance recordings, but it sets out the principle of storage limitation.
In practice:

• minimum: 30 days (under the Law on Private Security)

• maximum: as long as is necessary to achieve the purpose for which the data were collected
  The employer should define the retention period and the deletion procedure for recordings in internal acts. These issues are sensitive because there is always the dilemma whether deleted recordings have in fact been permanently erased.

7. Who has the right to view the recordings?

Access to recordings must be strictly limited. Only authorised persons within the company, as well as competent authorities (e.g., the police, courts) in situations provided by law, have the right of access.
It is advisable to:

• keep an accurate log of access to recordings (who, when and for what reason accessed the recorded footage)

• introduce technical and organisational protection measures (passwords, access control, physical protection of servers)
  Access to recordings must not be enabled for third parties without a legal basis, on which it is necessary to consult a specialist in each specific case.

Conclusion

Video surveillance of employees is not a prohibited practice, but it should be strictly regulated. Employers must strike a balance between their business interests and employees’ rights to privacy and dignity.
Non-compliance with video-surveillance regulations can lead to high fines, loss of reputation and damaged workplace relations.
Therefore, before installing cameras, check:

• Is the purpose of recording justified?

• Is there a less intrusive measure that can achieve the same purpose?

• Have you properly informed employees?

• Do you store data in accordance with the ZZPL?
  If you are not sure whether your actions comply with the law, consult a specialist.