The same rules apply to employees. This means that if they are standing on a stage or sitting in the audience, images of them may be published (at least if it is a public event and not, for example, an internal workshop).
In addition, the images must either be necessary as part of the job performance or the employees must consent to the recordings.
When is the publication of images as part of the work required and permitted?
Whether taking pictures is part of the job depends on the employment contract. Ideally, this would be expressly agreed, for example in the case of social media managers or content creators, that their job also includes working in front of the camera.
Otherwise, an “obligation to tolerate images” can also arise from the circumstances, for example in the case of a PR spokesperson who represents a company and has to tolerate images being taken of herself.
Does this mean that I have to ask for consent from employees in other cases? What if they don't want to consent?
Consent must be voluntary. If, for example, employees in the accounting department do not want to appear in a team photo, you cannot force them to do so. And if you did, they would have a right to injunctive relief, deletion and compensation.
It should also be remembered that consent and its voluntary nature must be proven. Since the end of 2019, it is no longer necessary for consent to be given in writing. Consent can also be given electronically, i.e. by email or on the intranet by clicking on an "Agree" button.
However, employees must be informed of the voluntary nature of the consent, their right to withdraw and other rights, the purposes of using the images, etc. A framework agreement should therefore be concluded with all of these details. This is particularly helpful if images are taken frequently, as this means that such a "contract package" does chinese america data not have to be concluded each time.
What happens if employees resign or withdraw their consent? Do all team photos, YouTube videos, Facebook posts, etc. have to be deleted?
On the one hand, it can be agreed that the termination does not automatically represent a revocation of consent. However, if the revocation is declared, then at least the text of the law provides for an obligation to delete without any counterarguments.
It has not yet been clarified whether there is a legitimate interest in continued use in such cases. There will be no interest in continued use of the recording if the fame or expertise of employees is used to advertise (e.g. a doctor's recording on a clinic's website after he has resigned). Even if deletion is easy (e.g. an old Facebook post), the employer is unlikely to have a legitimate interest in retaining the recording.
The situation is different if, for example, an employee appears in an image video or in a printed brochure. Here, I at least assume that the recordings can continue to be used (e.g. until the brochure is used up).
However, I
Special case video?