Video Surveillance in the Workplace in Switzerland

The use of video surveillance in the workplace can be a valuable tool for companies. It helps enhance security, improve work processes, and ensure quality control. However, constant surveillance also carries risks: it can place employees under pressure, harm their health, and infringe on their personal rights. If surveillance is used without justification, it undermines not only trust between employer and employees but also the overall workplace environment. In cases of misuse, legal consequences such as fines or compensation claims may follow. To maintain trust and minimize risks, clear rules and open communication are essential.

In Switzerland, the protection of employees’ personal integrity is legally protected. According to Art. 328 of the Swiss Code of Obligations, the employer must respect and protect the personality of the employee during the employment relationship. Additionally, Art. 26 of the Ordinance 3 to the Labour Act (ArGV III) stipulates that monitoring and control systems may not be used to monitor employee behavior in the workplace. If such systems are required for other reasons, they must be designed and implemented in a way that does not impair the health or freedom of movement of employees

  1. When is surveillance permitted?

      2. Monitoring or control systems may only be used under certain conditions, and must always be necessary and proportionate. Installing video surveillance may be justified under the following conditions:

    • Overriding business interest: This includes the protection of people, data, or assets. Examples are surveillance in banks, jewelry stores, or art galleries. Crucially, monitoring must be limited to necessary areas and not serve as a tool for systematic behavior monitoring of employees. The system must be designed to minimally impact employee privacy.

    • Production, quality, or performance monitoring: Surveillance may be permitted if it is operationally necessary to optimize processes—for example, through automatic counting systems on assembly lines. Even then, systematic behavioral assessment must not take place.

    • Compliance with legal requirements: Certain industry-specific regulations may require surveillance. For instance, under Art. 31 of the Casino Ordinance (Spielbankenverordnung), continuous video surveillance is mandated for entry areas, gaming halls, and cash desk zones in casinos.

    • Surveillance based on a justified suspicion of criminal conduct. Surveillance may be permitted in individual cases, for example, through a court order, if there is sufficient suspicion of a criminal offense by specific individuals.
  2. What needs to be considered?

    3. The processing of surveillance data is fully subject to the Data Protection Act (revDPA). In line with data protection principles, the following must be observed when introducing and operating workplace video surveillance:

    • Legality: Video surveillance must be lawful. A justification may exist if it serves a legitimate interest, such as evidence collection, prevention or investigation of criminal activity, protection of property, or enforcement of house rules.

    • Proportionality: The purpose of surveillance must be clearly defined, necessary, and appropriate. “Necessary” means that no less intrusive means are available to achieve the intended purpose. The least intrusive method must always be chosen. A careful balancing of interests between business needs and employee rights is essential.

    • Purpose limitation: Recorded video data may be used only for the purposes that were defined in advance.

    • Transparency: Employees must be informed in advance about the type, scope, and purpose of the video surveillance and the related data processing. Surveilled areas must be clearly marked with signs, visible before entering the monitored space.

    • Data minimization: Unnecessary video recordings must be deleted promptly. The retention period depends on the purpose and specific circumstances, but should be as short as possible. The Swiss Federal Data Protection Commissioner (FDPIC) generally assumes that data should be deleted within 24 to 72 hours. Longer retention must be justified by the purpose of the surveillance.

    • Technical and organizational security: Measures must be in place to protect recorded data from unauthorized access. Infringements on employee privacy can be minimized by restricting surveillance to certain hours, such as nighttime, weekends, or public holidays, when there is an increased risk. Public areas should be pixelated or excluded from the field of view. Real-time pixelation of faces also contributes to protecting personal privacy.

Conclusion

Workplace surveillance in Switzerland is a sensitive issue that requires a careful and balanced approach. While employers have a legitimate interest in monitoring and managing their operations, employee privacy takes precedence Swiss law provides a clear framework aimed at reconciling these interests and defining the limits of permissible surveillance. An open and trustworthy work environment, where rights and responsibilities on both sides are communicated transparently, is ultimately the best foundation for successful and productive collaboration.