Can a job do this

Studiostichup

Can a job delete footage regarding an incident
Before you get to see it
And sack you

GarIT

Your post is very unclear.

If the footage is theirs they can delete it.

If you are there less than a year they can sack you at any time for any reason. If not they have to follow a disciplinary procedure unless you have broken the law.

Studiostichup

GarIT wrote: »

Your post is very unclear.

If the footage is theirs they can delete it.

If you are there less than a year they can sack you at any time for any reason. If not they have to follow a disciplinary procedure unless you have broken the law.

Yes the footage is from the cctv in factory
I am there over 5 years
We requested to see the footage for the whole investigation.
After they sacked me on my appeal they showedme footage taken of a monitor screen
Taken on a mobile phone which
Only shows after the incident. But the part to prove me correct is gone

GarIT

Studiostichup wrote: »

Yes the footage is from the cctv in factory
I am there over 5 years
We requested to see the footage for the whole investigation.
After they sacked me on my appeal they showedme footage taken of a monitor screen
Taken on a mobile phone which
Only shows after the incident. But the part to prove me correct is gone

It appears they have followed the correct procedure. If you feel is was unjust you need to contact a solicitor who can advise you.

Studiostichup

GarIT wrote: »

It appears they have followed the correct procedure. If you feel is was unjust you need to contact a solicitor who can advise you.

Is the correct procedure to not show me the footage to sack me on .
And can they delete before appeal is still going on
They can sack me but not show me evidence

splinter65

Studiostichup wrote: »

Is the correct procedure to not show me the footage to sack me on .
And can they delete before appeal is still going on
They can sack me but not show me evidence

If you think you have been unfairly dismissed then you should go to your local Citizens Information Centre and ask them to help you to make a complaint to the WRC. You have nothing to lose and it doesn’t cost you anything. Just know that if they decide to respond to your complaint they probably will employ a solicitor and barrister who will be very hard on your testimony and evidence.
But that should be your first move. Go in the CIC and talk to someone.

ForestFire

Why would you go to CIC, would it not be better to go direct to NERA?

But I think part of the question the op maybe asking is, can the company use partial cctv evidence to sack him, while at the same time removing and deleting part of this evidence they relied upon themselves.

I don't know the answer but seems suspect.

Fann Linn

Is the cctv even admissable, ie were the correct procedures followed?

OldMrBrennan83

GarIT wrote: »

It appears they have followed the correct procedure. If you feel is was unjust you need to contact a solicitor who can advise you.

It appears they didn't from what the OP says. That said, there's nothing they can do about it.

GarIT

Patww79 wrote: »

It appears they didn't from what the OP says. That said, there's nothing they can do about it.

I meant disciplinary procedure rather than the cctv footage. OP mentioned an appeal, so they have that end of it covered.

Studiostichup

GarIT wrote: »

I meant disciplinary procedure rather than the cctv footage. OP mentioned an appeal, so they have that end of it covered.

Also told no statements had be taken but they were produced them at disciplinary desicion meeting

lawred2

GarIT wrote: »

It appears they have followed the correct procedure. If you feel is was unjust you need to contact a solicitor who can advise you.

Surely if you request to see the incident for which you are being fired, you are entitled to see it?

How is deleting their only evidence following any sort of correct procedure?

Studiostichup

lawred2 wrote: »

Surely if you request to see the incident for which you are being fired, you are entitled to see it?

How is deleting their only evidence following any sort of correct procedure?

Thats my point exactly

dhaughton99

You hit one of your colleagues?

GarIT

lawred2 wrote: »

Surely if you request to see the incident for which you are being fired, you are entitled to see it?

How is deleting their only evidence following any sort of correct procedure?

I replied to another similar comment above. I meant the steps they are required to take with disciplinary procedure.

To answer your questions though.
In some cases they may not even be permitted to show you the recording. That probably isn't the case here, but we don't know.

People can be fired without video evidence, it may affect the company later on if they had to defend their decision in court but I can't think of anything that could compel them to keep the recording.

OP also hasn't specified if they have a camera system that records over it's own footage, every 24-hours, 3 days, or week, or if somebody from the company actively went and deleted the video.


It's not exactly the same but I had something similar happen to me in Maynooth University, I was assaulted by another student who had some sort of friendship with the head of security who deleted the footage and the advice I got at the time was they can do that if they want to. Until the Gardaí ask them to hold onto it they don't have a responsibility to.

Studiostichup

GarIT wrote: »

I replied to another similar comment above. I meant the steps they are required to take with disciplinary procedure.

To answer your questions though.
In some cases they may not even be permitted to show you the recording. That probably isn't the case here, but we don't know.

People can be fired without video evidence, it may affect the company later on if they had to defend their decision in court but I can't think of anything that could compel them to keep the recording.

OP also hasn't specified if they have a camera system that records over it's own footage, every 24-hours, 3 days, or week, or if somebody from the company actively went and deleted the video.


It's not exactly the same but I had something similar happen to me in Maynooth University, I was assaulted by another student who had some sort of friendship with the head of security who deleted the footage and the advice I got at the time was they can do that if they want to. Until the Gardaí ask them to hold onto it they don't have a responsibility to.

Im cool with that but why show me anything
The show me a recording of after the event
But dont caputure what i say
The recording only shows from clearly 10 mins after the event
And is taken from mobile phone of the camera screen

GarIT

Studiostichup wrote: »

Im cool with that but why show me anything
The show me a recording of after the event
But dont caputure what i say
The recording only shows from clearly 10 mins after the event
And is taken from mobile phone of the camera screen

That's something you really need a professional to help you with.

As you said in the other thread maybe they didn't like you and did it on purpose if you really need an answer to why.

splinter65

ForestFire wrote: »

Why would you go to CIC, would it not be better to go direct to NERA?

But I think part of the question the op maybe asking is, can the company use partial cctv evidence to sack him, while at the same time removing and deleting part of this evidence they relied upon themselves.

I don't know the answer but seems suspect.

NERA is WRC now. WRC is an office in Carlow. If you ring them or email them they will direct you to the ecomplaint form.
If you google NERA you will be brought to the website of a solicitors firm where you will pay for advice.
CIC is free and they will fill in the form with/for you.

cml387

You seem focused on a narrow point i.e the existence or not of CCTV evidence.

If CCTV is the only evidence, and it now doesn't exist then I would suspect that you have a case.
However if there are witnesses who will say you did what you did (and I'm not suggesting guilt or innocence here) then you may have a problem.

Studiostichup

cml387 wrote: »

You seem focused on a narrow point i.e the existence or not of CCTV evidence.

If CCTV is the only evidence, and it now doesn't exist then I would suspect that you have a case.
However if there are witnesses who will say you did what you did (and I'm not suggesting guilt or innocence here) then you may have a problem.

Hi They have a witness bit the cctv would show him to be lying
Thats why they deleted it

OldMrBrennan83

cml387 wrote: »

You seem focused on a narrow point i.e the existence or not of CCTV evidence.

If CCTV is the only evidence, and it now doesn't exist then I would suspect that you have a case.
However if there are witnesses who will say you did what you did (and I'm not suggesting guilt or innocence here) then you may have a problem.

It's not hard for a place to fabricate witnesses and if they're the type of place to edit video evidence then I wouldn't put it past them anyway. If I was the OP I wouldn't expend too much energy on it and focus on getting something else.

beauf

Studiostichup wrote: »

.... But the part to prove me correct is gone

Sounds very sus to me. If you are there 5yrs it would be worth taking it further.

Deleting footage make them look guilty even if they are not.

punisher5112

Is there a union?

Wrc is an option.

Who did you have with you for meeting?

Hoboo

Procedure is very flawed.

You've a right to see evidence.
You've a right to see and contest witness statements.
You've a right to face your accuser.
You have a right to representation at all stages.

Contact CIC as suggested or WRC yourself. It won't even get to court by the sounds of it, WRC will tear them a new one.

https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Complaints_Disputes/Refer_a_Dispute_Make_a_Complaint/

Studiostichup

dhaughton99 wrote: »

You hit one of your colleagues?

No i did not but they say i did but the tape would prove me right this is my issue

Studiostichup

punisher5112 wrote: »

Is there a union?

Wrc is an option.

Who did you have with you for meeting?

Yes Union is with me
Next step is WRC
I am waiting on the result of appeal now
The appeal has new circumstances
As video shown is recorded on phone
But didnt record the bit to show my version
But recorded from the origi al footage

punisher5112

Studiostichup wrote: »

Yes Union is with me
Next step is WRC
I am waiting on the result of appeal now
The appeal has new circumstances
As video shown is recorded on phone
But didnt record the bit to show my version

Then how can you or they prove it wasn't tampered with.

This can not be used it must be the original unmolested footage.

Contact the data controller.

You need to keep at the union

Studiostichup

beauf wrote: »

Sounds very sus to me. If you are there 5yrs it would be worth taking it further.

Deleting footage make them look guilty even if they are not.

Yes deleteing footage is bad but making a recording of the footage to a phone but leaving out the critical part is even more sus
Would you agree

punisher5112

Has there been a Garda investigation?

If not then ask the question why not.....

You have a bit of a hard time ahead but seriously keep at them and don't accept how it's gone so far.

Studiostichup

punisher5112 wrote: »

Then how can you or they prove it wasn't tampered with.

This can not be used it must be the original unmolested footage.

Contact the data controller.

You need to keep at the union

They did tamper
They deleted it but before hand took a copy to a phone and recorded what only the wanted me to see.
I asked to see from 7pm at the time of incident
But they produce this phone footage that only shows from 7:10pm

punisher5112

Studiostichup wrote: »

They did tamper
They deleted it but before hand took a copy to a phone and recorded what only the wanted me to see.
I asked to see from 7pm at the time of incident
But they produce this phone footage that only shows from 7:10pm

That's not what I said I'm coming across on your side here.

I'm stating the fact it's not the original footage so can not be used as it can, has or may well have been altered.

runawaybishop

Studiostichup wrote: »

They did tamper
They deleted it but before hand took a copy to a phone and recorded what only the wanted me to see.
I asked to see from 7pm at the time of incident
But they produce this phone footage that only shows from 7:10pm

Forget about the CCTV. If it doesn't support their case it's not a surprise it was deleted. Nothing you can do about it

Figure out how to prove the witness is lying.

cml387

What has your union rep said?
It seems as if he didn't do much for you if you were fired.

punisher5112

I've been in similar where footage was produced 20 minutes after the fact and I was still pursued by the Gardai.

This was all over another road user and a complaint.

I had witnesses stating I done nothing but was still pursued.

Studiostichup

punisher5112 wrote: »

That's not what I said I'm coming across on your side here.

I'm stating the fact it's not the original footage so can not be used as it can, has or may well have been altered.

Oh i totally see you point
I was just stating they did. Was not taking a snap at you your advice has been very helpful
And im very greatfull sorry if my comment cane across defensive

porsche boy

Don't know if it's been said as I didn't read all comments.

Arrange a meeting with a solicitor or free legal aid. If you want to go further make a complaint to WRC, you will find report forms on their website. Proper legal advice is what's needed here.

punisher5112

Op have you looked for employment elsewhere for the time being?

This could take quite some time so be prepared for the long haul/wait.

I hope it all works out for you and just keep a record of anything and everything.

jimmycrackcorm

runawaybishop wrote:

Forget about the CCTV. If it doesn't support their case it's not a surprise it was deleted. Nothing you can do about it

The CCTV is important because they are hiding the facts.
Nearly ask CCTV systems keep recordings for a month so the fact it was deleted so quickly and only shown after the actual incident would be fix grounds to contest.

Op, what did they say when you asked for video for 10 minutes before?

runawaybishop

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The CCTV is important because they are hiding the facts.
Nearly ask CCTV systems keep recordings for a month so the fact it was deleted so quickly and only shown after the actual incident would be fix grounds to contest.

Op, what did they say when you asked for video for 10 minutes before?

Contest want? They are under no obligation to keep footage. If they have a witness they do not need footage.

Studiostichup

runawaybishop wrote: »

Contest want? They are under no obligation to keep footage. If they have a witness they do not need footage.

Yes they have a witness but the cctv would show the witness is lying this is why they deleted it. Does this hold no ground ?

runawaybishop

Studiostichup wrote: »

Yes they have a witness but the cctv would show the witness is lying this is why they deleted it. Does this hold no ground ?

Nope, you can't prove that's why it was deleted. Can you prove the witness is lying some other way?

1hnr79jr65

OP, this sounds like a very suspicious issue what your former company have done from what you said, there are some that support your side and there are folks here who are so skeptical and negative about your situation that it may cause confusion or wrong actions to be taken.

My advice is to ask a mod to close this thread, use your union rep and legal adviser ONLY for the purposes of this case to ensure you are getting the correct inputs and direction of how to manage your issue.

Use these people and focus on this task and good luck with your case.

runawaybishop

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

OP, this sounds like a very suspicious issue what your former company have done from what you said, there are some that support your side and there are folks here who are so skeptical and negative about your situation that it may cause confusion or wrong actions to be taken.

My advice is to ask a mod to close this thread, use your union rep and legal adviser ONLY for the purposes of this case to ensure you are getting the correct inputs and direction of how to manage your issue.

Use these people and focus on this task and good luck with your case.

Union rep wasn't much use if they didn't even go to the appeal with the op.

Snotty

Studiostichup wrote: »

Yes they have a witness but the cctv would show the witness is lying this is why they deleted it. Does this hold no ground ?

The cctv is deleted, alot harder to prove the cctv footage WAS deleted because someone is lying, all we know if it's gone now. You are connecting the two things, but that's doesn't prove anything.

There is no regulation around cctv being retained in a normal workplace. Our system used to only record 48 hours, it depended on the size of the hard drive and as they were motion sensor, the busier the area, the less timescale that would be recorded.

Couple of questions need to be answered, what is the normal retention of footage? If its 24 hours, then you have no argument.
How is footage removed from the system, is it exported to a disk and does someone know how to do that? Before I started in my current job, the boss used to get the cctv installer out to export any footage needed, so if he needed something non critical, he'd just record it off the screen using his phone.

ItsLikeThis

Surely there is data protection issues regarding recording cctv footage from a mobile phone?

Snotty

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

Surely there is data protection issues regarding recording cctv footage from a mobile phone?

Why is that an issue? private property we are assuming.

Kristopherus

Snotty wrote: »

Why is that an issue? private property we are assuming.

If its a workplace,as in factory, there is an issue. And, since earlier this year, there may be GDPR issues as well.

ItsLikeThis

From dataprotection.ie; "The storage medium should be stored in a secure environment with a log of access kept. Access should be restricted to authorised personnel."

Snotty

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

From dataprotection.ie; "The storage medium should be stored in a secure environment with a log of access kept. Access should be restricted to authorised personnel."

We are assuming the OP asked to see it, they allowed him to view a video copy which is correct, not sure the GDRP goes as far as covering the distribution system. Why is a recording on a phone different that a zip file. There is other questions like who else is in the video that was viewed, blurred faces and all that.
I'm not saying what they did was 100% correct, but a breach of GDPR doesn't mean the OP was unfairly dismissed.
The retention period is the biggest question here.

jamesbere

What I can't understand is why footage was shown to op that is 10 mins after the incident. That makes no sense whatsoever.

You need to find out from detail how recordings are retained in the company and why you were shown footage from a pho e after the incident which is proving your innocent.

A solicitors letter is the best way to go, something sounds suspicious here. I definitely think you have a case.

Sir Oxman

jamesbere wrote: »

What I can't understand is why footage was shown to op that is 10 mins after the incident. That makes no sense whatsoever.

You need to find out from detail how recordings are retained in the company and why you were shown footage from a pho e after the incident which is proving your innocent.

A solicitors letter is the best way to go, something sounds suspicious here. I definitely think you have a case.

I agree, the 10 minutes after is indicative of tampering/covering up unless by some miracle the retention period of 24hr/48hr/a week etc ends exactly at 1910hrs
the method of recording it from the screen on mobile phone is dodgy as well

OP, I agree with the above suggestion - go to see an experienced employment representative or employment solicitor.
Yes, it will cost (usually a consult fee and if it goes to WRC a percentage of your award if won) but believe me in a situation where you have lost your job unfairly, you will be full of emotion and employment law and the WRC requires a very level fact based logical head, the WRC is not interested in emotion or distress.

It's difficult to pick yourself back up from something like this but apply for other employment to mitigate your circumstances and keep records of all that you do in this regard.

Do not let this go, bring a case against them.