Recently, newspaper headlines have published such news: "Pearson Airport workers monitor their ex-husbands with surveillance cameras." This raises an old question, "Who comes to monitor" the monitor?
In public places like airports, video surveillance is a necessary safety measure, and most travelers also tolerate this. However, these people who are authorized to monitor the public should be originally for public interest purposes. But what if they use video surveillance equipment to seek personal gain for themselves? Is their company responsible for their actions?
To a certain extent, this issue should be decided by the federal court of Canada. Next, a hearing will be held and the "Big Toronto Airport Authority" will participate. A few years ago, an employee of the Toronto Airport Authority was accused of using surveillance equipment to monitor her ex-husband. Her duties were originally to monitor the traffic at the Toronto Pearson International Airport through a video surveillance device. At the time, her ex-husband and their children and his new girlfriend were entering the airport. The employee immediately collided with them. Needless to ask, the entire scene made her ex-husband extremely uneasy and embarrassed. In December 2008, the man formally requested the Airport Authority of Greater Toronto to hand over the surveillance of his family to the airport.
According to a report from the Parliament, these pictures were taken without the consent of the parties and the parties were unaware of it. Obviously, it was not a normal need for surveillance shooting. In addition, the GTAA did not respond to the client’s request within the stipulated 30 days.
In order to avoid inappropriate monitoring and avoid legal liability, related companies need to draft a video surveillance policy to prevent employees from using the company’s surveillance video equipment for personal gain. Such policies should be printed and distributed to all employees so that everyone can know it. And the most important thing is to implement it. We believe that the point of departure is the monitoring of public transport sites that protect the public and their interests, but the monitor should not use it for personal purposes. The monitor should also be monitored by the company. If monitors fail our trust, they and their companies should take responsibility.
In public places like airports, video surveillance is a necessary safety measure, and most travelers also tolerate this. However, these people who are authorized to monitor the public should be originally for public interest purposes. But what if they use video surveillance equipment to seek personal gain for themselves? Is their company responsible for their actions?
To a certain extent, this issue should be decided by the federal court of Canada. Next, a hearing will be held and the "Big Toronto Airport Authority" will participate. A few years ago, an employee of the Toronto Airport Authority was accused of using surveillance equipment to monitor her ex-husband. Her duties were originally to monitor the traffic at the Toronto Pearson International Airport through a video surveillance device. At the time, her ex-husband and their children and his new girlfriend were entering the airport. The employee immediately collided with them. Needless to ask, the entire scene made her ex-husband extremely uneasy and embarrassed. In December 2008, the man formally requested the Airport Authority of Greater Toronto to hand over the surveillance of his family to the airport.
According to a report from the Parliament, these pictures were taken without the consent of the parties and the parties were unaware of it. Obviously, it was not a normal need for surveillance shooting. In addition, the GTAA did not respond to the client’s request within the stipulated 30 days.
In order to avoid inappropriate monitoring and avoid legal liability, related companies need to draft a video surveillance policy to prevent employees from using the company’s surveillance video equipment for personal gain. Such policies should be printed and distributed to all employees so that everyone can know it. And the most important thing is to implement it. We believe that the point of departure is the monitoring of public transport sites that protect the public and their interests, but the monitor should not use it for personal purposes. The monitor should also be monitored by the company. If monitors fail our trust, they and their companies should take responsibility.
Carving Station,Chafing Dish,Heat Lamp,2-Lights Marble Carving Stations
Shaoxing Biaoyi Hardware Products Co., Ltd. , https://www.byeob.com