Mystery Shoppers

[Happy]

The wife works for a major DIY retail chain.  The staff have been told that the company are about to re-introduce mystery shoppers.

They have also been told that the mystery shoppers will secretly film any of the staff that they talk to (without their knowledge).

I am of the opinion that this is not allowed - human rights etc?

Would any members care to offer their advice please?

Regards Happy

 

[Bound2Please]

If your not doing any thing wrong..................... what is there to worry about......... PC going bonkers again worrying about being filmed at work....

I'm probably filmed a 100 times a day when im out do I worry no cos I aint done nuffin wrong.

Charlie

[Gracie]

Hi Alan

I did a quick search as your question intrigued me, I found this www.mystery-shoppers.co.uk, I haven't read it properly yet but it might help. Jeez, I'm thinking of joining, getting paid to shop, heaven lol

Grace

 

[Hylander]

Happy , what is to be worried about for goodness sake. Anyone who is carrying out their job correctly have nothing to be worried about. The. Human Rights law is being abused daily by people who are trying to make a buck out of the system. God help us, in my 50 years of work if every something didn't go my way I would never have been out of. Court, we just got on with it. Grow up.

 

 

[Baitrunner]

I think we need to understand a bit more about the circumstances before we go at Happy that hard!

i agree if your not doing anything wrong then what's the worry? No different to your employer reading your emails or if they provide a staff wifi monitoring who is doing what!!! Same as road cameras. Don't bother me. In fact I like them from a security perspective. I'm not talking speed cameras though!!! Although if you dont speed nothing to worry about there either!!!

it may be said shop is looking to shed staff and Mrs Happy desperately needs the job? Is the filming to try and find someone who just forgets to say the rights words etc - nothing nasty or malicious- and they are going to use it as a means to get rid of people. I would be worried and want to confirm it's legal  

Or is it to improve the customer experience, identify training needs etc. Rather than for something more naughty. 

By the way I think it's perfectly legal so just try and be on your best behaviour. At least they have warned you. 

[grendel]

my wife has done several mystery shopping posts, one at starbucks, you are pretty much given a script of what to buy, at starbucks she had to take the temperature of the drink when she got outside.

at another shop she was considered so reliable that she was commissioned to mystery shop several branches where the results were too good and it was suspected that the other people who mystery shopped there were in thick with the managers and skewing the results, in one shop this was patently obvious as the staff were performing very mediocre compared to the rave reports received from the other mystery shopper.

mystery shopping does result in consistent standards being applied across all of a companies branches and makes sure best practices are spotted and rolled out to all. if the company is aiming to use it to punish staff then they are doing it wrong, its more a way of identifying excellence and spreading it to all branches, if used correctly, and breaches the trust with the employees if used to mete out punishment, 

one of the nicest comments I heard today at work, was a new member of staff who commented that everyone he met was happy so we (as a company) must be doing something right.

[Viking23]

If people are too happy at work, it usually means that have something going on lol that management are not aware of.

This is a true story.

A friend of mine was a steel fabricator, and there were always short off cuts of large square tubular steel sections ready for the scrap man.

The directors applauded this guy for working late most nights, always welding, well in fact he was using the facilities to manufacture wood burners, incinerators and barbeques, he had orders coming out of his ears from most of the staff that worked there lol  The directors just never noticed. The higher up in management you were... the less you paid lol (back hander lol)  The Works manager knew about it too, he had a couple lol

What happened to the fabricator guy? , he set up a fabrication business and is a sole director of that. I still keep in touch with him, must be nearly 40 years ago he was doing this. I think he keeps a close eye on the guys on the shop floor, he knows all the tricks... he invented most of them lol

[dnks34]

Its likely that in most retail environments your going to be on film anyway, employee and customer so to take that a step further is going to put employees backs up in my opinion. 

I do think that any company feeling the need to use mystery shoppers will have fundamental management problems going on and any issues with staff are probably deeper than just those at the coal face.  

A company can become obsessed with knowing exactly what its employees are getting up to at all times and in most cases it destroys moral and that negativity will get paid onward by the staff. 

I have worked for a few companies who have done an excellent job of making a workplace miserable. 

[Viking23]

There are lots of views on whether videoing without permission is allowed, or ethical. In my opinion, it is one thing to video and record a conversation for your own use, but sharing it with third parties is another thing. If and it is only if at this stage, the video is presented to an employer, and that employer used it as evidence against that employee which may result in people loosing their job then an Unfair dismissal hearing would surely side with the employee. If video evidence cannot be used in court hearings them I doubt it would be acceptible in a an unfair dismissal case, but what do I know. There are people that have studied employment law at a high lever for three years or more, I guess they would know. 

There are folk that video mishaps for "you've been framed"  or YouTube, they are put into the public domain without the person's permission or their knowledge. Some people profit from it too £250 for "You've been framed" lol  You don't get to hear of any cases being brought against them.

Secret videos of the Royal Family have been published without their knowledge, don't mention the german uniform and that "salute" lol  All student type banter at the time in a small private group, should never have become public, choose your friends carefully it would seem. 

Now with camera drones, what will we be seeing and hearing next?

Where's my gun lol... Can't legally shoot them down, but you could radio jam them.

 

[Timbo]

I know a couple of businesses that use mystery shoppers, primarily because they pride themselves on their customer service. They sell incredibly 'high end' products but at the same time demand that each and every customer be served to an exceedingly high standard no matter how much they spend. The staff enjoy seeing how close they can get to 100% in the mystery shopper reports.

There's a trend these days for shop staff to gossip away between themselves. And some of the looks they give you if you as a customer should disturb their inane chatter could kill. I was blessed with a very loud, eardrum piercing, tooth ache generating whistle which I often deploy usually at Tesco where after I've wasted an hour of my life waltzing round the place I can't do what I normally do when faced with poor service...and take my business elsewhere.

Having said that, I was well impressed by a lady serving at the chemists yesterday. The woman in front of me in the queue was busily holding a conversation on her mobile. The chemist ignored her and moved straight to me. Before I had chance to speak the woman on the phone started shouting 'oi I was next!' to which the chemist replied 'I was doing you the courtesy of allowing you to finish your conversation in private. I will serve you as soon as I am free and you have finished your conversation'. Classic! 

[Hylander]

Well done the lady in the chemist,    pity more people don't do the same.     They have no manners and obviously don't realise how rude they are being to the person behind the counter. Whatever did these brain dead people do before mobile phones,    Did they stay at home at speak on the telephone all day,  no of course they didn't,  most of us were out working to pay the bills.

 

 

[Happy]

13 hours ago, Hylander said:

Happy , what is to be worried about for goodness sake. Anyone who is carrying out their job correctly have nothing to be worried about. The. Human Rights law is being abused daily by people who are trying to make a buck out of the system. God help us, in my 50 years of work if every something didn't go my way I would never have been out of. Court, we just got on with it. Grow up.

 

 

It has now been 14 hours since I first posted on this and have waited to see other members comments before replying to yours.  FACT:  at no time did I state that I either agreed or disagreed with the companies actions.  I was merely trying to get opinions from other members of this 'friendly forum'.  In view of your comments I think

you need to GROW UP, read my post again and NOT SLAG ME OFF.  The reason for posting was actually to determine whether the company might have problems over this in the future.  I thank the members that did not jump to the wrong conclusions.  Alan (Unhappy!)

[riyadhcrew]

SLAGGING of members on this forum is strictly NOT ALLOWED. Differences of opinion are common and expected.

I think Alan, that some people only read the last post and not the whole thread, so they don't know the whole story. I am sure there was nothing personal against you.

[Vaughan]

33 minutes ago, Happy said:

It has now been 14 hours since I first posted on this and have waited to see other members comments before replying to yours.

I also have waited, since my reply at the time would have been a bit blunt, to say the least!

As to "50 years of work and just got on with it" I am glad for Hylander that she has never had to go through what I did, when the family business I had been proud to work for was sold, and the new global style management decided to try and get rid of all the senior yard managers, since we knew more about running boatyards than they ever would. I suffered more than 4 years of this and nearly ended up in hospital, before they finally succeeded in finding a little thing they could get me for.

This is when the use of mystery shoppers takes on a different, sinister and intolerable atmosphere in a company's staff. In my case it even included the stealing from my office desk of all the thank-you letters that I had got from customers, over 20 years, in case I later wanted to present them in court.

I can assure Hylander that should this ever happen to her she will find it does not involve growing up and I agree with Happy's natural concern about the legality of such filming, which could easily be mis-used by a hostile head office management.

[MauriceMynah]

This is an argument I often have with people, when discussing things like CCTV and hidden cameras. With the administration we have at the moment, there is nothing wrong with any of it. If you are doing what you are supposed to be doing, and where  you are supposed to be doing it, then you have nothing to fear... but just hold on a moment. That's ok with THIS government, including any of the major parties as and when THEY come to power.

But what would happen if for some unaccountable reason the far right or far left came to power. How would we feel about it then? Big brother could happen. I'm not saying it will, but we must never forget that it could.

Whether you are for or against the man remember, nobody thought that Donald Trump would end up where he is. These things can happen. That's why we need the legislation, the Human rights laws.

Ok, sorry but there is no alternative to my making a political statement here. This protection we are trying to protect and enhance here, was that which was provided by the House of Lords. It included the bishops and the aristocracy giving it left to right wing balance. It included hereditary peers who were nobody's puppets. and for 400 years, it worked. It was an opposition that no matter how large the government majority was, it was answerable.

It has been weakened over the recent years so now we need Human rights laws.... which of course can be changed by government if they are found to be "inconvenient"

So... to sum up... Yes Happy, I'd object to the secret filming of employees if I where you.

[kfurbank]

Happy, Alan, asked for advice, rather than opinions, so I'll keep it to advice.

You state they may be filmed without their knowledge, but this is not strictly true as they have been warned that mystery shoppers are being introduced and they will be filming, it's just not known where or when, which is much the same as most CCTV systems. I believe the law on secret filming is much the same as that for CCTV. Google have recently released a set of glasses that allow the user to record what they see. Anyone wearing a pair can record what they see for their own use, however much like secret filming if the recordings are to be used in the public domain then you have to let the person know and get their permission to use the recording. The mystery shoppers are effectively filming in a public place, that is assuming they don't have access to rest rooms or canteens where staff on rest breaks can expect a certain amount of privacy, therefore any filming in a public place would be legal for personal use, providing the footage didn't make it on to TV etc. If the company has warned that there is a possibility of filming taking place and how that footage could be used then it isn't breaching the law, even if it doesn't warn of the exact time, place and location. A company with CCTV should inform staff that it uses CCTV and that it could be active at any time and may be used for disciplinary reasons. They do not have to state which cameras are active, where the cameras are, and how they are reviewed.

[LondonRascal]

In retail environments, large parts of the working area will be monitored by CCTV anyway and is allowed to be without any consent on the part of the employees, but they must be told it is going on and certain rules followed: https://www.gov.uk/data-protection-your-business/using-cctv

I suspect that the company supplying the mystery shoppers has pitched this as a new exciting into customer experience in real time.  Since it is taking place inside the shop there is nothing wrong or against the law going on there and, the mystery shoppers themselves are going to be subject to scrutiny - did they do what they were told in the way that they should have etc so it works both ways.

If you were to raise your concerns with management, they may well think of this as a 'red flag' - why does a member of staff object to this? So if it were  me I'd personally not be very happy about it, but I'd likely keep quiet but keep a keen eye on any issues that might flare up with a customer, these are where misunderstandings and complaints can occur the most and could be what management want to see how such is dealt with.

[kfurbank]

Maurice posted whilst I was and raised some interesting points, however whether we believe CCTV and secret filming is ethical or should be allowed, is different to whether it is currently legal? There are many things that are legal which we may not like or want, or believe to be ethical.

 

[Wussername]

ACAS provides guidance on this matter as follows:

Being monitored at work

Employers may wish to monitor their workplace for various reasons, the Data Protection Act doesn't prevent employers from monitoring workers, but employers should remember workers are entitled to some privacy at work. Employers must tell employees about any monitoring arrangements and the reason for it.

Key points

• Employers should have written policies and procedures in place regarding monitoring at work.
• Monitoring shouldn't be excessive and should be justified.
• Staff should be told what information will be recorded and how long it will be kept.
• If employers monitor workers by collecting or using information the Data Protection Act will apply.
• Information collected through monitoring should be kept secure.

Monitoring in the workplace can occur for a variety of reasons; it can be used to safeguard employees, for example to ensure workers aren't at risk from unsafe working practices. In some sectors employers may have a legal or regulatory need to carry out some monitoring. The information gathered through monitoring should only be used for the purpose it was carried out for, unless it leads to the discovery of other things such as a breach of health and safety.

Employers may monitor staff at work in various ways, this can include:

• CCTV
• looking at use of email or website visits
• listening in on telephone calls
• bag searches
• email and web monitoring.

[Vaughan]

6 minutes ago, Wussername said:

Employers may monitor staff at work in various ways, this can include:

• CCTV
• looking at use of email or website visits
• listening in on telephone calls
• bag searches
• email and web monitoring.

Thank you for posting that Andrew, although I find it most disquieting. I notice throughout their text, the use of the word "should" rather than "must". In terms of regulations, these two words mean very different things.

The last bit makes me very glad that I am now retired.

[Wussername]

I can see where you are coming from Vaughan and yes I agree with your comments.

ACAS has a tendency to "run with the fox and hunt with the hounds" However in a court of law it acts in an advisory capacity and its position is that of offering guidance to employee and employer alike, 

In this capacity it provides a useful bench mark for two sides who disagree on work practice to reach a compromise.

With regard to CCTV cameras in the work place I think that the leaning towards the employer is well established and that I believe is recognised by the courts.  

Edited January 27, 2017 by Wussername
typo

[Labrador]

36 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

 

The last bit makes me very glad that I am now retired.

Amen.

[donnygeoff]

At least the staff have been told... or is it a double bluff.....

I was mystery shopped while selling cars for a main dealer, we were not told in advance, and I was the unlucky one.

Now to earn money selling cars, you need to sell cars, I had 4 mouths to feed and a mortgage to pay......

My mystery shopper wanted to "buy" a small economical new car, he was "very" interested in the model that this main dealer did. I asked the questions to qualify what he wanted and we arrived at a 1.4 5 door hatch, after about an hour of talking and answering his questions I suggested that we take one from the demonstrator row so he can get a feel for the car.

"no" he said "that won't really be any help, the car is for my wife"

I then said " OK no problem, let's make an appointment for your wife to come in"

"no need, I can tell her all about the car and if she is interested I will bring her in"

"how can you tell her all about the car if you haven't driven it (bums on seats sell cars)"

anyway to cut a long question and answer session short, I decided I was wasting my time, stood up shook his hand and said "ok see you some other day" and walked off.

As I walked away, a customer I spoke to the day before came up to me and said "Hi Geoff, that car I took for a test drive yesterday, can I have it" he had been waiting for me for over an hour while I was with the mystery shopper.

Car sold, money in bank......

The mystery shopper left after about 15 mins sitting on his own

a week later, called into dealer principals office to watch a short video....

Lucky for me that month I had sold 26 cars and was the top man for the second month running, that apparently along with the sales manager sticking up for me, was the only thing that saved my job.

Mystery shoppers, I just love them.....

[grendel]

in my company we have trackers fitted to most of the company vans. these not only track the vans but have cameras to record the exterior and interior view of the cab. the company has very precisely set out what information they capture and to what use it can be put. bear in mind that this system records any accidents and if the vehicle is stolen also records an image of the thief. 

the protocols we have in place allow a manager to comment if the employee has been speeding, but not to punish an employee because of it, though the employee may be asked to take a speed awareness course, similarly with the cameras on board, these record and send data to a central computer, and only select people have access to that data, once again it is not allowed to be used for punishment, just to allow the manager to raise the issue as an advisory, for example suppose on several occasions the employee was seen on the phone whilst driving - he would be reminded of the company policy on using his mobile phone while driving  and recommended to pull over, or just turn his phone to silent while driving- or just make sure the bluetooth was working correctly on the employees van.

We had quite a few people who were against it at first, but as soon as people realised that nobody was being punished for transgressions, they accepted it and forgot about it, and just get on and work as normal.

[grendel]

I should add that one of the main benifits of the system is in an emergency we can locate the nearest operative and get them to the problem quicker, another use is to reduce the mileage each driver has to drive through the day.