![[Basket]](images/basket.png){kind=small}
Your order![[cover image]](images/issue/BK201511.jpg)
Biometrics — fingerprint, hand and face recognition software
[ch 4: page 40-41]The use of biometrics to identify employees and other individuals is also increasingly being adopted in workplaces. This includes iris and retina scanning, fingerprinting or face and hand recognition technology.
As with use of ID swipe cards with embedded RFID chips (see page 35), this technology can be used to track and identify employees and visitors in real time wherever they are on workplace premises.
Budgens supermarket was one of the first employers to trial a system of fingerprint technology to replace traditional clock-in devices in 2008. One manager commented: “Like most organisations we knew we had a problem with ‘buddy punching’ [colleagues clocking in on behalf of other workers] but we had no way to prove it…With the biometric technology we are able to ensure we are getting work for the hours we are paying…”
The system was provided by Time2 Biometric Clocking Systems, which was taken over by Auto Time Solutions in 2012. Auto Time provides a number of time and attendance “solutions” to over 5,000 clients according to its website.
The company markets a range of solutions to enable employers to monitor staff presence. Its website states: “Integration with biometric handscan terminals and web-enabled devices, such as PCs, smartphones and tablets provides fast, secure and accurate verification of staff attendance. The solution delivers transparent attendance data and meaningful analytics, enabling you to gain a clear overview of your organisation and manage your staff instantly” (http://vanquish-ips.com/solutions/time-attendance).
UNISON members at Westminster Council successfully fought a high-profile media campaign against fingerprinting/biometric signing-in procedures in 2008. Fingerprint recognition machines were installed in various workplaces across the borough without consultation or notification, to be used by employees in street management services to clock in. Members refused to provide the fingerprints needed for the introduction of the system. The branch also provided all members with a standard letter from UNISON Westminster branch to hand to their managers, explaining why they would not be cooperating with the new system and threatening to complain to the Information Commissioner.
Following a union meeting with the council chief executive explaining union objections, the machines were withdrawn.
UNISON guidance on biometric monitoring
Public services union UNISON has produced a factsheet on biometrics in the workplace. It warns of a “surveillance culture” which “can lead to increased stress, sickness absence and staff turnover.” It suggests that biometric monitoring “particularly for the purposes of checking on time-keeping” is clearly “an over-the-top and unnecessary measure”, and that employers should “aim to develop a relationship with staff based on trust — not excessive monitoring.”
Moreover, the choice of such surveillance raises the question of “the kind of relationship that employers want to have with their staff”. As the union notes, the process of fingerprinting is “understandably associated with criminality in the public mind”, so “when employers start fingerprinting their own staff it sends out a very negative and confrontational message.”
Nevertheless, the union suggests that in some “exceptional” cases, for example, where staff are accessing hazardous materials or “extremely sensitive” information, use of biometrics might be justifiable. But the focus here should be on security rather than on monitoring staff.
Where there is a proposal to introduce biometrics, the union says there should be full consultation with union members. The employer needs to explain the reasons why it is deemed necessary, and also carry out an equality impact assessment.
Employers’ need to guard against “interoperability”, whereby data collected for separate purposes is shared across different systems, has been highlighted by the ICO. The union suggests that employers need to be mindful of this, and ensure that the biometric data they keep on staff “cannot be easily transferred.”
The factsheet also refers to the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998. These include the requirement that data is processed fairly and lawfully, meaning that employers must “ensure that staff are informed about and understand the purpose for which their personal data is being processed.”
This also means biometric and any other personal data should not be used for purposes other than those for which it was collected, not kept longer than necessary, stored securely (and protected against unauthorised processing or accidental loss), and destroyed when the employee ceases to be employed by the employer.
https://www.unison.org.uk/content/uploads/2013/06/Briefings-and-CircularsBiometrics3.pdf