Legal Question in Civil Rights Law in Maryland

Re: Videotaping

The federal Electronic Communications and Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) governs video surveillance. If your company�s video was silent it would be excepted from the act. However, if it was videotape with audio, an employer may monitor employees only (1) in the ordinary course of business, or (2) with the employee's express or implied consent. You are right to be concerned because viewing a surveillance tape for entertainment or showing it to an employee�s mother is not what one considers as ordinary business practice.

Some employees seek common law claims for invasion of privacy such as intrusion of seclusion, unreasonable disclosure of personal facts, unreasonable publicity, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. One of the key elements for an invasion of privacy claim is whether the employee has a "reasonable expectation of privacy." Many courts have ruled that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the case of observable video surveillance or even with hidden surveillance if the physical space monitored is a public space. You are right, however, to be concerned about the distribution or �publicizing� of these personal facts of two employees.

Re: Videotaping

The federal Electronic Communications and Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) governs video surveillance. If your company�s video was silent it would be excepted from the act. However, if it was videotape with audio, an employer may monitor employees only (1) in the ordinary course of business, or (2) with the employee's express or implied consent. You are right to be concerned because viewing a surveillance tape for entertainment or showing it to an employee�s mother is not what one considers as ordinary business practice.

Some employees seek common law claims for invasion of privacy such as intrusion of seclusion, unreasonable disclosure of personal facts, unreasonable publicity, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. One of the key elements for an invasion of privacy claim is whether the employee has a "reasonable expectation of privacy." Many courts have ruled that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the case of observable video surveillance or even with hidden surveillance if the physical space monitored is a public space. There is good reason to be concerned about the distribution or �publicizing� of personal facts about two employees.