Recording not allowed in Welfare Offices

bobbyss wrote:

Which rule specifically are you referring to?

The rule that say no recording in the dole office & Garda Station. If you have been in the Garda station you will see the signs at the front desk. The rules are there to protect people using the dole office.

A person who is not convicted in a court of law yet might have to sign on in the local station daily. They are entitled to their privacy.

A person who is giving personal information about themselves and their family, including children is entitled to their privacy.

This is why you can't record. It might be a public office but you agree to abide by the rules by entering. If they have a sign saying no vaping would you vape in the building just because vaping isn't illegal?

Rules of the building. You want to enter you have to follow the rules. It's common sense

A court room is another public building. I'd love to see you try video inside a court room. Even a real journalist won't do that because it is against the rules.

If I need to keep an accurate record of what you say to me in your role as a public official, I'll use any tool available to me to ensure accuracy. If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear! Generally, however, I wouldn't even bother because the vaaast bulk of public officials Ive come across have been decent and helpful. But if someone is BS'ing or abusing me, rest assured, I'm gonna take appropriate action..

TomOnBoard wrote: »

If I need to keep an accurate record of what you say to me in your role as a public official, I'll use any tool available to me to ensure accuracy. If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear! Generally, however, I wouldn't even bother because the vaaast bulk of public officials Ive come across have been decent and helpful. But if someone is BS'ing or abusing me, rest assured, I'm gonna take appropriate action..

Well no, you wont. You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with. you dont get to make your own rules.

TomOnBoard wrote: »

If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear!

Does the same apply to your own work? You've nothing to fear about any 3rd parties recording video or audio of your professional dealings with them?

Sleeper12 wrote: »

A court room is another public building. I'd love to see you try video inside a court room. Even a real journalist won't do that because it is against the rules.

Courtrooms all over the world broadcast their proceedings except in certain cases such as those involving minors or family law.

Its only in backward, secretive systems where public access to Court proceedings is limited to those who can travel to and fit into the Courtroom.

Remember the adage: ..Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done...

bobbyss

Sleeper12 wrote:

The rule that say no recording in the dole office & Garda Station. If you have been in the Garda station you will see the signs at the front desk. The rules are there to protect people using the dole office.

Sleeper12 wrote:

A person who is not convicted in a court of law yet might have to sign on in the local station daily. They are entitled to their privacy.

Sleeper12 wrote:

A person who is giving personal information about themselves and their family, including children is entitled to their privacy.

Sleeper12 wrote:

This is why you can't record. It might be a public office but you agree to abide by the rules by entering. If they have a sign saying no vaping would you vape in the building just because vaping isn't illegal?

Sleeper12 wrote:

Rules of the building. You want to enter you have to follow the rules. It's common sense

I see. I didn't know about any such rule.

I wonder has there ever been a case around this issue.

My understanding was that if you are legally entitled to be in any part of a public building you could record for your own personal use. Just like if you were walking down the street.

I wonder what would happen if someone went into the reception area of a garda station and recorded anything you could see and hear?

I don't know what law would be broken.

bobbyss wrote: »

I see. I didn't know about any such rule.

I wonder has there ever been a case around this issue.

My understanding was that if you are legally entitled to be in any part of a public building you could record for your own personal use. Just like if you were walking down the street.

I wonder what would happen if someone went into the reception area of a garda station and recorded anything you could see and hear?

I don't know what law would be broken.

your understanding is wrong. as you have been told many times already. their building, their rules.

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Courtrooms all over the world broadcast their proceedings except in certain cases such as those involving minors or family law.

Its only in backward, secretive systems where public access to Court proceedings is limited to those who can travel to and fit into the Courtroom.

Remember the adage: ..Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done...

members of the public can go into practically any courtroom in the country with the exception of in camera cases.

cobhguy28

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

TomOnBoard wrote: »

If I need to keep an accurate record of what you say to me in your role as a public official, I'll use any tool available to me to ensure accuracy. If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear! Generally, however, I wouldn't even bother because the vaaast bulk of public officials Ive come across have been decent and helpful. But if someone is BS'ing or abusing me, rest assured, I'm gonna take appropriate action..

Well no, you wont. You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with. you dont get to make your own rules.

That is what this whole thing is about. Is there really a rule, a sign is not a rule. Who is making this rule is it department policy or is it just some office worker who is over stepping they role. Cause if it is the local worker, then it is not a rule as they don't have the authority to make one.
" You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with." No the people I am dealing with have to follow department policy and the law of the land. They are not the rule makers even if they think they are.

judeboy101

"You have no legal right to record an interaction with them"

tell that to Garda McCabe

TomOnBoard wrote:

Courtrooms all over the world broadcast their proceedings except in certain cases such as those involving minors or family law.

Not all over the world. In a few countries. But let's say every country in the world except Ireland. We are talking about Ireland. The rule is no recording in the court, a public building. No one breaks this rule because the judge would have them arrested there and then. This shows that public buildings CAN in fact have rules. As I said before if they don't allow vaping in the dole office you wouldn't vape even though vaping is perfectly legal.

TomOnBoard wrote:

Its only in backward, secretive systems where public access to Court proceedings is limited to those who can travel to and fit into the Courtroom.

That may be so but that is not the case in Ireland. Journalists are inside the court room and they do report what happens in the court. They have to stand OUTSIDE the court grounds if they want to take a photo though. Not just outside the court itself but outside the ground of the court

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

members of the public can go into practically any courtroom in the country with the exception of in camera cases.

Exactly what I said! The thing is you have to travel to the courtroom and when you do, you may not get in.

In line with developments in other jurisdictions, I look foward to the day when all appropriate court proceedings are broadcasted.

bobbyss wrote:

I see. I didn't know about any such rule.

I get that you are being deliberately thick about this but you are taking it a bit far at this point. You honestly thought that the signs in cop shops & the dole office were little more than a suggestion?

You honestly think that it is OK for you to record while I am in the queue next to you explaining my personal details to someone through a window? I might be talking about a disabled child or a disability I have myself or my wife. You can't possibly think that it could be a good idea to record?

bobbyss wrote:

My understanding was that if you are legally entitled to be in any part of a public building you could record for your own personal use. Just like if you were walking down the street.

Go to court and record what goes on in there. I double dare you. You already know that you can't record in a court. It's a public building and you are entitled to be there but like any building, public or private in Ireland there are rules.

TomOnBoard wrote:

Exactly what I said! The thing is you have to travel to the courtroom and when you do, you may not get in.

Journalists are in the court room and they repot the proceedings. We have a wonderful law in Ireland. They can't name someone till the case is ended. See what happened in the North with the rugby players. You really think that should have been on TV? They were acquitted and have to leave the country for work because the law in the UK allows them to be named

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Well no, you wont. You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with. you dont get to make your own rules.

But you do get to make your own rules?

And the arrogance of your position is dripping from "You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with"!!!

TomOnBoard wrote: »

But you do get to make your own rules?

And the arrogance of your position is dripping from "You will use whatever tools you are allowed to use by the people you are dealing with"!!!

The government department that owns the building make the rules. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

cobhguy28

Sleeper12 wrote: »

bobbyss wrote:

I see. I didn't know about any such rule.

I get that you are being deliberately thick about this but you are taking it a bit far at this point. You honestly thought that the signs in cop shops & the dole office were little more than a suggestion?

You honestly think that it is OK for you to record while I am in the queue next to you explaining my personal details to someone through a window? I might be talking about a disabled child or a disability I have myself or my wife. You can't possibly think that it could be a good idea to record?

bobbyss wrote:

My understanding was that if you are legally entitled to be in any part of a public building you could record for your own personal use. Just like if you were walking down the street.

Go to court and record what goes on in there. I double dare you. You already know that you can't record in a court. It's a public building and you are entitled to be there but like any building, public or private in Ireland there are rules.

There is a specific Contempt of court rule that forbids the public making a recording in Court. So what rule forbids recording our own interacting with a staff member in a social welfare office .

cobhguy28 wrote: »

There is a specific Contempt of court rule that forbids the public making a recording in Court. So what rule forbids recording our own interacting with a staff member in a social welfare office .

The rule made by the department of social protection.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Journalists are in the court room and they repot the proceedings. We have a wonderful law in Ireland. They can't name someone till the case is ended. See what happened in the North with the rugby players. You really think that should have been on TV? They were acquitted and have to leave the country for work because the law in the UK allows them to be named

Note my statement that "I look foward to the day when all appropriate court proceedings are broadcasted." The word 'appropriate' was inserted for good reason.

As to the rugby players, they had to seek work elsewhere because they were fired by their bosses in Ireland who didn't have the moral courage to stand by them.

uck51js9zml2yt

bobbyss wrote: »

But why would you call a journalist with a camera going about his job an 'idiot'?
(I am not a journalist. I am simply putting the case.)

Couldn't a member of the public, By the same token, argue that they feel intruded by the cctv inside buildings too?

I don't think consent is needed to post on you tube. I am not sure, but I don't think so.

There are cameras everywhere in buildings for the security of staff and customers. The difference is an unknown third party taking pictures of staff for unknown reasons while they are in their place of work.

TomOnBoard wrote:

Note my statement that "I look foward to the day when all appropriate court proceedings are broadcasted." The word 'appropriate' was inserted for good reason.

What's appropriate? The defendant is innocent throughout the trial. How do you decide before hand what ones are appropriate? I'm very glad to live in a country where an innocent persons identity is kept out of the public

TomOnBoard wrote:

As to the rugby players, they had to seek work elsewhere because they were fired by their bosses in Ireland who didn't have the moral courage to stand by them.

Not true at all. They were sacked because of the scumbag texts that they engaged in but sacked only because the public knew who they were. If the texts were read out in court but the names weren't published they wou still be playing in Ireland.

I'm glad I live in the South with my privacy protected

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The rule made by the department of social protection.

That's a rule, like? Is it backed up by a legal instrument?

TomOnBoard wrote: »

That's a rule, like? Is it backed up by a legal instrument?

why does it have to be backed up by a specific legal instrument? Are building owners not allowed to set conditions of entry?

TomOnBoard wrote:

That's a rule, like? Is it backed up by a legal instrument?

If you enter a shop & there is a rule helmets must be removed it's not a law. Its a rule. You want to wear your helmet then you don't get in.

Even in a public building there are rules. Some rules are from the department head but a rule by the local office manager is still as binding. The manager is paid to run the office and is an extention of the department head.

Every shop manager or department manager has the right to refuse admission. You can take it up with his/her boss at a later stage.

As I said earlier eventually someone will be prosecuted for threatening and intimidating behaviour for getting up in someones face with a camera. It's only a matter of time

bobbyss

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I get that you are being deliberately thick about this but you are taking it a bit far at this point. You honestly thought that the signs in cop shops & the dole office were little more than a suggestion?

You honestly think that it is OK for you to record while I am in the queue next to you explaining my personal details to someone through a window? I might be talking about a disabled child or a disability I have myself or my wife. You can't possibly think that it could be a good idea to record?

Go to court and record what goes on in there. I double dare you. You already know that you can't record in a court. It's a public building and you are entitled to be there but like any building, public or private in Ireland there are rules.

I think you may have misunderstood my post and my apologies for any lack of clarity on my part.

I have not been in a dole office for a long, long time and any time I have been in a Garda station I have never noticed any such rule posted. I didn't know such a rule existed.

Many posts above talk about the rules of the building etc. (One poster above says:'their building, their rules'. Their building? Just to be clear, I am not talking about private property, I am talking about the public's building ie our buildings).

But I am not talking about rules posted on noticeboards.

I am talking about laws and statutes.

What law prohibits me from recording in the manner described?

Apologies again for lack of clarity, but the above question is clear enough.

My posts clearly referred to audio recordings, and then solely for the purposes of keeping records of my own interaction(s) with officials. In such cases, their work is dealing with my service.

Wanderer78

If it's not officially allowed, do it unofficially, no big deal

bobbyss wrote: »

I think you may have misunderstood my post and my apologies for any lack of clarity on my part.

I have not been in a dole office for a long, long time and any time I have been in a Garda station I have never noticed any such rule posted. I didn't know such a rule existed.

Many posts above talk about the rules of the building etc. (One poster above says:'their building, their rules'. Their building? Just to be clear, I am not talking about private property, I am talking about the public's building ie our buildings).

But I am not talking about rules posted on noticeboards.

I am talking about laws and statutes.

What law prohibits me from recording in the manner described?

Apologies again for lack of clarity, but the above question is clear enough.

there does not need to be a law prohibiting it. A public building is not owned by the public. It is owned by whatever government department is using it or perhaps by the OPW. They have as much right to set rules of entry and conduct as any other premises owner.