Staff wearing body cameras

[InOban]

Moderator note - split from

Scotrail service not allowed to sit in "vestibule"?

Went for the 16:26 Aberdeen to Inverurie service. Struggling to get to the carraige due to mobility issues which as usual was parked quite a distance from the barriers. Conductor barked at me "you'd better hurry up as you're going to miss the train" so I got on at the end of a class 158. Sat...

www.railforums.co.uk

Don't all such staff wear body cameras?

 

[Berliner]

Don't all such staff wear body cameras?

Maybe at scotrail, but I don't think I've seen them on every TOC, but certainly outside the railway bodycams aren't routine on customer facing staff, other than someone in a security role and possibly paramedics.

In any event a bodycam doesn't stop someone being a used or filmed, it just means there is evidence of it and it's up to the employer to go further I'd assume.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Don't all such staff wear body cameras?

I choose to, it is little more than a reminder that if you punch me I'll be using the evidence captured to prosecute. I've still been verbally abused having pointed out I've been wearing one.

 

[gka472l]

I also choose to, my TOC is keen for as many of us on the front line to wear them. I will say that they do seem to have a deterrent effect too, having only had to activate it twice in several months of wearing one.....

 

[bramling]

I also choose to, my TOC is keen for as many of us on the front line to wear them. I will say that they do seem to have a deterrent effect too, having only had to activate it twice in several months of wearing one.....

Yes it is more about deterrence. People who choose to wear them do say that they have quite an effect.

That said, I’m not keen on the idea of cameras being shoved in faces. It’s rather sad that this sort of thing is deemed necessary.

 

[robbeech]

Yes it is more about deterrence. People who choose to wear them do say that they have quite an effect.

That said, I’m not keen on the idea of cameras being shoved in faces. It’s rather sad that this sort of thing is deemed necessary.

It’s sad but I’m generally in support of anything that can be used to stop people* being abused.


*staff AND passengers.

 

[falcon]

They can backfire. Kim Potter will confirm that.

 

[scotraildriver]

Moderator note - split from

Scotrail service not allowed to sit in "vestibule"?

Went for the 16:26 Aberdeen to Inverurie service. Struggling to get to the carraige due to mobility issues which as usual was parked quite a distance from the barriers. Conductor barked at me "you'd better hurry up as you're going to miss the train" so I got on at the end of a class 158. Sat...

www.railforums.co.uk

Don't all such staff wear body cameras?

Body cameras are entirely voluntary although more and more staff are using them.

 

[wobman]

Body cameras are entirely voluntary although more and more staff are uibg them.

Same at the toc I work for, I'm glad more are using them as a deterent

 

[Hadders]

At the company where I work (non rail industry) the use of body cameras had reduced reported incidents of harm and aggression against staff by 45% since they were introduced.

 

[Edsmith]

At the company where I work (non rail industry) the use of body cameras had reduced reported incidents of harm and aggression against staff by 45% since they were introduced.

A police officer I know said much the same thing and he wishes this technology had been available years ago. Equally of course members of the public can film them if they wish to do so.

 

[Nym]

I wouldn't expect that filming an enforcement officer of any kind overtly would go down well with them and it almost certainly would not de-escalate the situation.

 

[gka472l]

Yes it is more about deterrence. People who choose to wear them do say that they have quite an effect.

That said, I’m not keen on the idea of cameras being shoved in faces. It’s rather sad that this sort of thing is deemed necessary.

I agree, it is rather sad that we feel the need to wear such things. Is the world really much worse these days, or do we just hear about things easier with social media, internet etc??? Going back to the deterrent effect, it really does make people think about how they speak to you, even during disruption and the likes, I've not have anyone kick off at me whilst wearing it, when previously, you would always get one having a go.

 

[Edsmith]

I wouldn't expect that filming an enforcement officer of any kind overtly would go down well with them and it almost certainly would not de-escalate the situation.

I think police officers are well aware that being filmed is just part and parcel of the job nowadays.

 

[Monty]

A police officer I know said much the same thing and he wishes this technology had been available years ago. Equally of course members of the public can film them if they wish to do so.

My father in law is also a serving police officer and he loves them, protects him from people making false accusations of wrong doing and generally makes his job a lot easier.

We have just started to use them at my place of work, takes a little while to get used to but I think generally they help.

 

[Vespa]

It can work both ways, if you film a railway staff filming you in the event of ticketing dispute or query, it's amazing how many footage "disappears" if it doesn't support the defence of a company, this would ensure the staffs don't lie as well if they know they're being filmed.

*I knew somebody who was injured being brought down by a security guard who mistakenly thought he had stolen an item and being deaf didn't hear the challenge, he later sued them and the footage wasn't "available"....unsuprisingly.

 

[robbeech]

It can work both ways, if you film a railway staff filming you in the event of ticketing dispute or query, it's amazing how many footage "disappears" if it doesn't support the defence of a company, this would ensure the staffs don't lie as well if they know they're being filmed.

They are definitely only used to protect the railway under normal circumstances. That’s not to say that you wouldn’t be able to get a guard to provide it if you were attacked by a third party whilst the were there for example but it’s a lot of effort to find it so you couldn’t rely on it. And as you rightly say, any dispute that turns out with the guard being incorrect will be immediately destroyed.

Infact there was a case (which I have mentioned before) where video evidence (it was from on board cctv not a body cam but the same principle) was being used against a passenger but when it turned out the passenger was actually in the right the footage was destroyed.

 

[Facing Back]

And as you rightly say, any dispute that turns out with the guard being incorrect will be immediately destroyed.

Infact there was a case (which I have mentioned before) where video evidence (it was from on board cctv not a body cam but the same principle) was being used against a passenger but when it turned out the passenger was actually in the right the footage was destroyed.

Is that legal? If there is a case in which it is relevant, surely that is destroying evidence? Or is it unofficial?

 

[robbeech]

Is that legal? If there is a case in which it is relevant, surely that is destroying evidence? Or is it unofficial?

It was before anything was taken to court. It was a ticketing dispute on where the passenger boarded.

 

[seagull]

They are definitely only used to protect the railway under normal circumstances.

any dispute that turns out with the guard being incorrect will be immediately destroyed.

Presumably you work for all of the TOCs and know this as a fact.

Hint: you're wrong. I know of two members of onboard staff who have been disciplined and issued final warnings based on body cam evidence following a complaint.
I know of others who have been rightfully exonerated of wrongdoing following a malicious complaint. It is not in a (decent) staff manager's interest to allow wrong un's to continue in the job and in my experience they review and take appropriate action.

 

[robbeech]

Presumably you work for all of the TOCs and know this as a fact.

Hint: you're wrong. I know of two members of onboard staff who have been disciplined and issued final warnings based on body cam evidence following a complaint.
I know of others who have been rightfully exonerated of wrongdoing following a malicious complaint. It is not in a (decent) staff manager's interest to allow wrong un's to continue in the job and in my experience they review and take appropriate action.

Complaints against staff members’ behaviour is different to complaints against the railway. My point is that when the railway get it wrong ( a dispute on ticketing, accessibility etc) then the railway who is ultimately to blame will not provide evidence to support their error. This has been shown on many occasions.

 

[ic31420]

A police officer I know said much the same thing and he wishes this technology had been available years ago. Equally of course members of the public can film them if they wish to do so.

My father in law is also a serving police officer and he loves them, protects him from people making false accusations of wrong doing and generally makes his job a lot easier.

We have just started to use them at my place of work, takes a little while to get used to but I think generally they help.

I was dead against bodycams a few years ago, I thought they'd be a barrier to public comms as people wouldnt want to be filmed.

In reality I've done a complete 180. They're a great behaviour modifier. People have become a lot more prone to make complaints, it's amazing what people will allege what was said or done that simply didn't happen. Body cam footage simply negates this and a stressful complaint is cut off at the first point. Bodycams protect staff in more ways than you might think.

They've become second nature and normal for everyone and theyre not the barrier I thought they'd be.

You do however get the occasional halfwit acting up to the camera which is tedious strangely they never request a copy of their acting skills.


Any enforcement officer who gets shirty about being filmed by a MOP in a public place needs to question what they're doing. Film me and you'll get someone acting professionally, within the rules and respectfully. If I get something wrong I'll be the first to apologise, I'm human I get things wrong sometimes.

 

[TravelDream]

I was dead against bodycams a few years ago, I thought they'd be a barrier to public comms as people wouldnt want to be filmed.

This can be an issue, however, it's not as if footage is broadcast for anyone to see. It is only ever accessed if there's an incident and will otherwise be deleted. It's no different to CCTV in that regard.

I have a number of family members who are police officers. I know they all are very happy to have them issued and switch them on for every public interaction. It just makes sense to do so.

 

[ic31420]

Sometimes people will tell police officers things they don't want anyone to know they have said. They may trust the officer but be wary of the camera.

 

[InOban]

The feedback on this thread strongly suggests that any TOC which doesn't offer bodycams to the appropriate staff should reconsider their position, and the unions should encourage their members to use them.

 

[scotraildriver]

The bodycams we have don't record all the time, only if the wearer activates it. Normally a calm "I'm going to switch my camera on now for both our benefits" quickly diffuses the situation.

 

[gka472l]

The bodycams we have don't record all the time, only if the wearer activates it. Normally a calm "I'm going to switch my camera on now for both our benefits" quickly diffuses the situation.

Indeed, the two occasions I've activated it, I've stated that exact phrase just before activating. I should mention, after reading some comments on this thread, we have no access to the bodycam footage personally,
and cannot delete anything that has been captured.....

 

[thenorthern]

I wear one in public and yes it's perfectly legal to and no you don't need to tell people you are wearing one. More people should wear them in my opinion.

 

[Jim the Jim]

I wouldn't expect that filming an enforcement officer of any kind overtly would go down well with them and it almost certainly would not de-escalate the situation.

I would expect that anyone employed as an enforcement officer of any kind would be trained not to react to being filmed, especially if they themselves are equipped with a camera. They have to put up with a lot worse than someone getting their phones out to film them.

 

[aoa123]

I wouldn't expect that filming an enforcement officer of any kind overtly would go down well with them and it almost certainly would not de-escalate the situation.

Surprised to see comments like this on here, the unspoken implication is that the enforcement officer would expect to be in the right 100% of the time which is not the case in reality. In my experience enforcement officers don't like being pulled up on the fact when they are in the wrong.