Staff photographing celebrities without their permission?

[800001]

It's Reach plc (or Retch, as Private Eye refer to them) and so I'd take the idea it was a staff member taking these photos with a pinch of salt. The angle certainly looks as though it was taken from a seated position.

Having been in LNER first class several times with celebrities on the train, and having seen how LNER staff treated them, I'd both be very surprised and very disappointed if a member of LNER staff was taking photos like this and selling them to the papers. But once you send a photo to a WhatsApp group there's no telling what someone else will do with it.

The photo appears to be taken from the accessible toilet area of coach M, I would saythe person being photographed is sat in the accessible seats.

 

[12C]

I’d imagine their trains are well covered by CCTV and should the celebrity involved make a complaint it would be easy for bosses to see exactly who took the photo, especially as the location is easy to see out the window and would pinpoint the timeframe. This is what makes me think surely staff wouldn’t be so stupid, especially to pass it on to the media.

 

[Tetchytyke]

This is what makes me think surely staff wouldn’t be so stupid, especially to pass it on to the media.

I can imagine a staff member putting it on WhatsApp to a friendship group, and once it's on WhatsApp group all bets are off.

It just seems weird for a staffer to do it though. When I've seen them before with celebs there's normally a discreet question. Some celebs are only too happy to pose for photos- David Walliams, despite his reputation, was genuinely incredibly kind and patient with the crew when I saw him on LNER- and those that aren't get left alone.

 

[Flange Squeal]

If LNER staff are flogging this stuff to the papers then it really does show that standards have slipped there.

Indeed, shame really how low that the operator has gotten. As far as I can tell morale at LNER is in the toilet and has been for a while. Real shame as in their various incarnations the one thing that they always had going for them was, with a few notable exceptions, excellent staff.

From what we can tell, it only appears to be one member of staff that has taken this image, so it seems a bit harsh to lump all staff in the same boat as this one example. That's hardly going to help morale either, reading on here that they are all getting judged as going downhill because of the actions of one colleague like you clearly both are.

 

[ainsworth74]

From what we can tell, it only appears to be one member of staff that has taken this image, so it seems a bit harsh to lump all staff in the same boat as this one example. That's hardly going to help morale either, reading on here that they are all getting judged as going downhill because of the actions of one colleague like you clearly both are.

I could have phrased myself better but, to be clear, individual staff members on the whole still provide good customer service the majority of the time, often outstanding. No doubt they also go above and beyond to try and help people as well. The sort of behaviour seen here is still by far an away an outlier. However it does seem clear that, as an organisation, morale has fallen within the staff that work for the company which has knock on effects to the service as a whole (if people are miffed off with their employer, they're are less likely to volunteer to do overtime, or to help out in little unnoticed ways). But, to be clear, my interactions as a passenger with the majority of LNER staff are nothing but positive.

 

[Seehof]

When I came across a celebrity, I preferred to have a few words with them (if they wanted to) than take a photo or selfie. Noel Gallagher was very pleasant and interesting however there is no proof that I have met him!!!

 

[island]

Genuine question; is a train a public or private space? I have no idea

A train is both private property and a public space.

A public space is a space to which members of the public have access, either generally or upon payment of a fee.

It is not generally illegal to take photographs in a public space, as long as they are not indecent etc. In particular, it is not generally illegal to take photographs of a minor without parental consent. Might get you punched in the nose though...

I suppose I don't get the difference between it and a shopping centre, both are "public" but the latter is called out as a "private space" in the linked article above

An example of each:

• Public property that is a public space: A council-owned park
• Public property that is a private space: A government agency's head office
• Private property that is a public space: A theme park
• Private property that is a private space: My house

It's also possible for a space to change between public and private. For example, after closing time, the theme park becomes a private space, or the government agency might hold an event that people can come to.

Agreed, and the owner of the land has the right to set restrictions on whether or not someone on their land is allowed to take photos.

But breach of those restrictions does not create a breach of the law, or any other consequence besides perhaps the photographer being escorted off the land.

As for staff members taking photographs of passengers for reasons not connected with their work duties, that may render them liable to disciplinary consequences.

 

[jettofab]

For example, taking a photo of a train pulling into a station - ok, taking flash photos into a cab where someone is trying to work without discussion or permission - not ok.

I strongly dislike people taking photos of me (or videoing me) while I'm at work/working. I find it intrusive and distracting and it discourages me from interacting with enthusiasts which is a shame for those who have no intention of photographing me, but it's how I feel unfortunately. I understand that legally they are free to photograph me.

Whilst again I understand it's legal for people to photograph celebrities going about their business I find it kind of distasteful and frankly a little odd! I think the same of the few colleagues I have who selfie-hunt while working, and feel more than a little sorry for the celebs who get targeted.

 

[dcbwhaley]

It must be pretty frustrating being someone 'known' and you can't go anywhere without someone wanting an autograph or a selfie.

That is what they are paid for.
They would be even more frustrated if nobody paid them attention when they wanted it

 

[CarltonA]

I have not got a very good memory for faces - but many years ago I was sat in a ship's lifeboat going ashore on Lundy Island and the chap sitting opposite me looked rather familiar but I couldn't place him. On the way back I saw the same chap and realised it was actor Timothy West (who is a rail and ship enthusiast). I would never have even considered taking his photo either asking him or even attempting it covertly. Just wouldn't seem right.

I was onboard the Waverley that day as well. It was about twenty five years ago. Apparently it broke down on the way back to Barry, l had disembarked at Ilfracombe. Prunella was there as well.

When I worked in an Oxford St retailer, so many celebs came in that we were totally accustomed and usually did not let on that we recognized them. Certainly we never tried to photo them, v bad form IMO.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That is what they are paid for.
They would be even more frustrated if nobody paid them attention when they wanted it

It may well be what they are paid for - but surely when they are travelling from A to B, they are in effect "off duty" and have as much right as the rest of us to be left alone?

 

[John Luxton]

I was onboard the Waverley that day as well. It was about twenty five years ago. Apparently it broke down on the way back to Barry, l had disembarked at Ilfracombe. Prunella was there as well.

When I worked in an Oxford St retailer, so many celebs came in that we were totally accustomed and usually did not let on that we recognized them. Certainly we never tried to photo them, v bad form IMO.

I don;t recall Prunella - but I am not that good with faces. I have only landed at Lundy a three of times looking at my list of images taken there and I suspect this trip was either 1992 or 1994. I too alighted at Ilracombe. I did see Timothy West on board the Balmoral not too long after that.Only celeb I really got to see a lot of was Ken Dodd as he used to come into our family shop for his greetings cards.

 

[danbarjon]

Didn't she know there was a complimentary food offering?

Easily done to be fair, we are always doing that…

 

[Busaholic]

Running my own bookshop in Cornwall for three decades I met plenty of quite famous people, and a few very famous ones, mostly actors, comedians and writers, but politicians of all stripes, cooks, gardeners and journalists too. Almost no photographic record of any of these encounters exist, which is fine both by me and most of the famous people, I'm sure. Some of them returned, a few many times and the only occasion there was anything like a problem was when Charles Dance arrived unannounced one Friday afternoon and his presence drew a largish crowd to the outside of the shop, 95% female. I can confirm his eyes are exceptionally blue, but so are mine and I've never had that effect on the ladies!

 

[Egg Centric]

I wouldn't believe it was staff just because some tabloid said it was.

If it was they should be sacked, no ifs, no buts. But I prefer to think better of them than believe some scumbag tabloid.

 

[66701GBRF]

Suggesting sacking is harsh and ridiculous. A meeting or a file note is more than adequate.

 

[Haywain]

That is what they are paid for.
They would be even more frustrated if nobody paid them attention when they wanted it

She is paid (very well) to act, not to travel by train and does not appear to be doing anything to seek attention in the way you suggest.

 

[43066]

She is paid (very well) to act, not to travel by train and does not appear to be doing anything to seek attention in the way you suggest.

I disagree. She is appearing in public as someone who is famous and who presumably benefits from the trappings that come with that. People in that position can’t just expect to flick a switch and become totally anonymous when it suits them. These days they can and will be photographed almost everywhere and, if they want to avoid that, can easily afford to travel by other means.

That’s not to say staff should be taking such photos, of course, but that picture in itself is nothing out of the ordinary and could just as easily have been taken by a passenger; the gutter press is full of famous people being photographed in similar circumstances.

 

[Haywain]

I disagree. She is appearing in public as someone who is famous and who presumably benefits from the trappings that come with that.

No, she is not making a public appearance for the purposes of publicity, she is just travelling. I do not agree that being famous means that you are paid for your whole life to be considered open.

 

[AlterEgo]

I disagree. She is appearing in public as someone who is famous and who presumably benefits from the trappings that come with that. People in that position can’t just expect to flick a switch and become totally anonymous when it suits them.

Of course they can't, but I think they have a reasonable expectation that people should feel a bit of shame if taking a covert pic of them and then having it published.

 

[Randomer]

So I work in an industry where encounters with 'famous' people could be called relatively common both working with and also as patrons. It has always been viewed as bad taste to talk about them to people outside the company at the time and very bad taste to talk about them to people outside of the industry. Taking or sharing photos without permission are viewed as a whole higher level of bad taste.

My current employer has clear policies around taking photos of anyone and an equally clear social media policy about posting them. Essentially don't do it and definitely don't do it without permission. I'm very happy to comply with that and expect others to as well.

Taking covert photos even without the above is just bad taste especially if then sharing them to media companies for a reward.

 

[43066]

No, she is not making a public appearance for the purposes of publicity, she is just travelling. I do not agree that being famous means that you are paid for your whole life to be considered open.

The only relevant point is that she’s visible in public. Celebrities are not above the law, and there is (rightly in my view) no intrinsic right to privacy, or to not to be photographed in such circumstances.

In reality I doubt she would be in the least bothered by a photo like this, which simply comes with the territory. She will be well used to it!

Of course they can't, but I think they have a reasonable expectation that people should feel a bit of shame if taking a covert pic of them and then having it published.

Personally I agree it’s poor form. However it would be naive not to realise that some people have absolutely no shame and will do anything for money. See the celeb pages of the Daily Mail for plenty more examples of famous people “papped” sitting in restaurants, sunning themselves on yachts etc. (not that I look at them!). There is a huge market for these images, so morals don’t really come into it.

The difference here is the allegation that a staff member took the photos, and I think we are all in agreement on that point.

 

[Egg Centric]

Suggesting sacking is harsh and ridiculous. A meeting or a file note is more than adequate.

Nope - it's a service industry. Do you want to worry that the hospitality team might be surreptitiously photographing you to share online? It's a gross invasion of privacy. Possibly even a security concern. And would undoubtedly be putting LNER in disrepute. (Would be totally different if they asked to take a photo but this isn't much different to a creepshot).

However as I also said just because a tabloid says it was "staff" doesn't mean it was...

 

[dcbwhaley]

She is paid (very well) to act, not to travel by train and does not appear to be doing anything to seek attention in the way you suggest.

For her to get those well paid acting jobs she needs to be well known and well ,liked by the public. So pandering to the publics desire to see her is a sensible career move.

 

[Haywain]

Suggesting sacking is harsh and ridiculous.

That depends on whether it can be shown to be gross misconduct, or the employee has a sufficiently poor record that another lesser charge would warrant dismissal. Suggesting dismissal seems to be a knee jerk reaction that overlooks the need to go through disciplinary procedures.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Suggesting sacking is harsh and ridiculous. A meeting or a file note is more than adequate.

Taking surreptitious photos, whilst at work, of your customers without their consent and selling them to Retch should be- and very likely is- gross misconduct.

As I also said, I take the idea it was a staff member who sold the photo with a pinch of salt. I strongly suspect that if the photo was taken by a staff member then it will have been shared to a family or friends WhatsApp group and then sold onwards from there.

 

[weastebusdepot]

That is what they are paid for.
They would be even more frustrated if nobody paid them attention when they wanted it

They aren't paid to entertain people 24/7 though, in fact actors were very much part of the 'gig economy' long before the term had ever been invented.

I had a spell working at Media City in Salford and would often recognise familiar faces from the tv when they were sitting on a bench having a coffee or queuing for their lunch in Greggs. I didn't consider bothering them as I figured I'd find it just as annoying when people stop me to ask for travel advice when I'm on my break!

 

[Trackman]

I've only seen one selfie with staff on VT and that was Peter Crouch.
What I've found out throughout the years staff ask 'Are you such and such a person?' say hello and leave it as that - then I ask the staff 'who was that????' lol and all that

 

[AlterEgo]

For her to get those well paid acting jobs she needs to be well known and well ,liked by the public. So pandering to the publics desire to see her is a sensible career move.

But she was literally just existing on a train.

 

[LowLevel]

But she was literally just existing on a train.

On which she has paid for a ticket, indeed a premium one for first class - absolutely right that staff should show some discretion - I'm not sure why there's even an argument on here. I recall someone losing their job over taking an unauthorised photo of a celebrity and putting it on social media and that was years ago.