Categories: Insights, Practice


1 May 2018

The operational instructions of the INL on audiovisual aids and other control instruments

The National Labour Inspectorate (“INL”), with its circular No. 5/2018, has given operational instructions on the problems concerning the installation and use of audiovisual aids and other control instruments. According to the INL, should any employees be filmed, the latter should take place as a rule accidentally and occasionally, but nothing prevents the direct shot of the employee, provided that there are reasons grounding the control, without introducing any conditions such as the ‘shot angle’ of the video camera or ‘the obscuring of the employee’s face’. Furthermore, according to the INL, it is not fundamental to specify the predetermined locating and the exact number of video cameras to be installed, without prejudice to the fact that the shots must be consistent and strictly connected with the reasons entitling the control and declared in the relevant request. The circular also dwells upon the justifying reason under article 4 of the Workers’ Statute as to the “protection of the company’s assets”, by stressing that the principles of lawfulness and exactness of the pursued aim, as well as of the respective proportionality, fairness and non-incidence, call for gradualness – as stated by the Italian Data Protection Authority – as to the extent and type of monitoring, which makes more invasive controls residual.  Always according to the INL, any remote access to the images ‘in real time’ must only be authorised in exceptional cases duly grounded. Last, but by no means least, the INL dwells upon the biometric recognition installed on the machines in order to prevent unauthorised parties from using it. This is considered a fundamental tool to “… do the job …” and, therefore, its installation may take place regardless, pursuant to paragraph 2 of article 4 of the Workers’ Statute, of both the agreement with the trade unions and of the authorisation administrative procedure foreseen by law.

 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

8 Apr 2026

Management of corporate email after termination of employment: the limits according to the Italian Data Protection Authority

The Italian Data Protection Authority (i.e. “Garante per la protezione dei dati personali”) has once again provided guidance on how employers should manage corporate email accounts after the…

8 Apr 2026

Oral dismissal: the burden of proof on the employee

With order no. 4077 of 23 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court addressed the issue of oral dismissal, holding that an employee challenging the termination of the employment…

8 Apr 2026

DID YOU KNOW THAT… incompatibility between colleagues may justify the transfer of an employee? 

The Italian Supreme Court, with order no. 4198 of 25 February 2026, held that an employee’s transfer may be lawfully implemented also in the presence of a situation…

7 Apr 2026

The boundary between rest and inactivity in the management of working hours (AIDP – HR Online, 7 April 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Alesia Hima)

In the organizational language of companies, terms such as “breaks,” “waiting times,” or “downtime” are often used. In operational practice, these expressions tend to be treated almost as…

17 Mar 2026

Equal pay: green light for the decree on pay equality and wage transparency (People are People, 16 March 2026 – Claudia Cerbone, Martina De Angeli)

Claudia Cerbone and Martina De Angeli, professionals at the De Luca & Partners firm, author this article dedicated to the draft legislative decree approved last February 5 by…

10 Mar 2026

The transfer of the employee is lawful when there is incompatibility with the company environment (Camera di Commercio Italo-Francese, 10 March 2026 – Vittorio De Luca, Silvia Zulato)

With Order No. 4198 of 25 February 2026, the Italian Supreme Court (Court of Cassation) – Labour Section – reaffirmed that a situation of environmental incompatibility may justify…