(July 6, 2017) Addressing a number of rumors and speculation about video and possible audio surveillance of Ocean Pines employees in areas ranging from the administration building to Mumford’s Landing and the beach club, Director Slobodan Trendic sent an email to the other board members on June 27 requesting discussion on a video surveillance policy.
However, it appears that discussion will go no further than that.
The text of Trendic’s email follows.
“As you know from the recent exchange between Director Stevens and me, I have a very different view on the ‘video surveillance’ subject.
“I am absolutely of the opinion that a video surveillance in workplace is a matter for the board to decide. This is clearly a new policy and I do not agree that such can be decided and implemented unilaterally as it was done recently by the acting general manager.
“Furthermore, I reviewed OPA’s new Employee Handbook that five directors voted to approve. As you recall Director [Cheryl] Jacobs and I were absent from this meeting. The new handbook fails to include such a written policy. I would like to share with you the following information below having done additional research.
“I would also suggest Director [Tom] Herrick requests a legal opinion if the current video surveillance should stop or continue since the board has not approved such activities as a policy. At this point, do we know if any laws are being violated; if proper procedures were followed, if the employees were properly informed, etc.? While we wait for the legal opinion, and if the acting general manager feels surveillance in the workplace is necessary, I recommend he prepares a motion for the board to vote on based one clearly developed written policy.”
Trendic included in the email a series of recommendations based on two articles: “An Employer’s Guide to Hidden Cameras in the Workplace” by David B. Wilson and “6 steps to avoiding liability from video surveillance in the workplace” written by William G. Benz and published on the website Inside Counsel.
His recommendations included identifying and documenting reasons for surveillance, stating health, safety, theft prevention, workplace productivity and security reasons were acceptable, and providing notice to employees that surveillance was taking place. He advocated holding meetings with staff to address any concerns and adopting a written policy “reserving the right to monitor the workplace with visible and hidden cameras.”
Reached for comment on the subject, Interim General Manager Brett Hill seemed to imply he did not expect any further board action or discussion on the subject.
“Video surveillance has been in place in the majority [of facilities] owned and operated by Ocean Pines for greater than 10 years. It would be up to the board to make any changes to existing policy,” Hill wrote in an email. “I am not aware of any formal discussions scheduled to take place, given how long surveillance has been a part of the business practices of the Association.”
However, it appears that discussion will go no further than that.
The text of Trendic’s email follows.
“As you know from the recent exchange between Director Stevens and me, I have a very different view on the ‘video surveillance’ subject.
“I am absolutely of the opinion that a video surveillance in workplace is a matter for the board to decide. This is clearly a new policy and I do not agree that such can be decided and implemented unilaterally as it was done recently by the acting general manager.
“Furthermore, I reviewed OPA’s new Employee Handbook that five directors voted to approve. As you recall Director [Cheryl] Jacobs and I were absent from this meeting. The new handbook fails to include such a written policy. I would like to share with you the following information below having done additional research.
“I would also suggest Director [Tom] Herrick requests a legal opinion if the current video surveillance should stop or continue since the board has not approved such activities as a policy. At this point, do we know if any laws are being violated; if proper procedures were followed, if the employees were properly informed, etc.? While we wait for the legal opinion, and if the acting general manager feels surveillance in the workplace is necessary, I recommend he prepares a motion for the board to vote on based one clearly developed written policy.”
Trendic included in the email a series of recommendations based on two articles: “An Employer’s Guide to Hidden Cameras in the Workplace” by David B. Wilson and “6 steps to avoiding liability from video surveillance in the workplace” written by William G. Benz and published on the website Inside Counsel.
His recommendations included identifying and documenting reasons for surveillance, stating health, safety, theft prevention, workplace productivity and security reasons were acceptable, and providing notice to employees that surveillance was taking place. He advocated holding meetings with staff to address any concerns and adopting a written policy “reserving the right to monitor the workplace with visible and hidden cameras.”
Reached for comment on the subject, Interim General Manager Brett Hill seemed to imply he did not expect any further board action or discussion on the subject.
“Video surveillance has been in place in the majority [of facilities] owned and operated by Ocean Pines for greater than 10 years. It would be up to the board to make any changes to existing policy,” Hill wrote in an email. “I am not aware of any formal discussions scheduled to take place, given how long surveillance has been a part of the business practices of the Association.”