Hello Group,
                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over 
zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff into 
opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate 
inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do 
contain family photosand personal possessions  etc. These searches are 
completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our  right 
to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.

                                               Cheers
                                                  Chris

"chris"  wrote in message 
news:Z2abk.137984$8H5.92605@newsfe10.ams2...
> Hello Group,
>                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over
> zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff 
> into
> opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate
> inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do
> contain family photosand personal possessions  etc. These searches are
> completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our 
> right
> to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.
>
>                                               Cheers
>                                                  Chris
>
>
Just a thought - who provided the locker?

"chris"  wrote in message 
news:Z2abk.137984$8H5.92605@newsfe10.ams2...
> Hello Group,
>                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over
> zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff 
> into
> opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate
> inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do
> contain family photosand personal possessions  etc. These searches are
> completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our 
> right
> to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.

Lockers are normally provided in the workplace to give employees somewhere 
safe to store their valuables during working hours. They are no more 
personal property than a desk drawer, although many people treat both as 
such. It is also unlikely that anyone is going to expend the time, expense 
and effort of carrying out random searches without some good reason, such as 
pilfering, either from the company or from individuals, or a problem with 
drink or drugs in the workplace.

Colin Bignell

chris wrote:
> Hello Group,
>                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against
> over zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully
> staff into opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything
> inapropriate inside. These lockers do not contain anything
> inapropriate ever, they do contain family photosand personal
> possessions  etc. These searches are completly random and it seems to
> me that it is an infringment of our  right to privacy however I need
> something to come back at them with.
>
>                                               Cheers
>                                                  Chris

This is what a trade union is for.

If no union, is there a term in your employment contract covering this ?

If not, ask for a change in the contract.

Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle management to 
routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the employment contract says 
so or not.

I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these searches, but 
if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a different kettle of 
fish.

Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
> chris wrote:
>> Hello Group,
>>                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against
>> over zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully
>> staff into opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything
>> inapropriate inside. These lockers do not contain anything
>> inapropriate ever, they do contain family photosand personal
>> possessions  etc. These searches are completly random and it seems to
>> me that it is an infringment of our  right to privacy however I need
>> something to come back at them with.
>>
>>                                               Cheers
>>                                                  Chris
> 
> This is what a trade union is for.
> 
> If no union, is there a term in your employment contract covering this ?
> 
> If not, ask for a change in the contract.
> 
> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle management to 
> routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the employment contract says 
> so or not.
> 
> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these searches, but 
> if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a different kettle of 
> fish.

What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage 
property?  It is entirely reasonable.

The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.

Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees' 
equipment (such as cars for example).

Thanks for the replys,
                          First of all we have a good union  and they say 
that management absolutley cannot open up our lockers on a whim without 
perfectly good reason. I agree if something had gone missing then if you had 
nothing to hide then there shouldnt be any problem but some of these newly 
appointed managers have introduced a whole new climate of awkwardness  in 
the workplace , the reasons ? well only they can tell. These beat up old 
lockers are not a privelige believe me. we are not contractually obliged to 
have our lockers inspected when these managers feel like it neither. I 
suppose if they feel that its their storage facility and they have every 
right i think I will leave every bit of stuff in a large suitcase by my 
locker and they can go and get stuffed I suppose

                                            Chris
"Dave"  wrote in message 
news:486e0cf6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk...
> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
>> chris wrote:
>>> Hello Group,
>>>                  Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against
>>> over zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully
>>> staff into opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything
>>> inapropriate inside. These lockers do not contain anything
>>> inapropriate ever, they do contain family photosand personal
>>> possessions  etc. These searches are completly random and it seems to
>>> me that it is an infringment of our  right to privacy however I need
>>> something to come back at them with.
>>>
>>>                                               Cheers
>>>                                                  Chris
>>
>> This is what a trade union is for.
>>
>> If no union, is there a term in your employment contract covering this ?
>>
>> If not, ask for a change in the contract.
>>
>> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle management to 
>> routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the employment contract 
>> says so or not.
>>
>> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these searches, 
>> but if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a different 
>> kettle of fish.
>
> What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage 
> property?  It is entirely reasonable.
>
> The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.
>
> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees' 
> equipment (such as cars for example).
>
>

In message <486e0cf6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk>, at 12:50:08 on Fri, 4 Jul 
2008, Dave  remarked:
>Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees' 
>equipment (such as cars for example).

I briefly worked at a factory where employee's cars were routinely 
searched as they left the premises.
-- 
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <486e0cf6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk>, at 12:50:08 on Fri, 4 Jul
> 2008, Dave  remarked:
>> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
>> equipment (such as cars for example).
>
> I briefly worked at a factory where employee's cars were routinely
> searched as they left the premises.

Were there circumstances making this a reasonable routine ?
-- 
FERGUS O'ROURKE
www.irish-lawyer.com
(Not just law stuff)

Dave wrote:
> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
[snip]
>> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle
>> management to routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the
>> employment contract says so or not.
>>
>> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these
>> searches, but if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a
>> different kettle of fish.
>
> What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage
> property ?

The laws of contract and tort.

>It is entirely reasonable.

Why ?

> The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.

Who said that it was a privilege ?

> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
> equipment (such as cars for example).

Policies do not necessarily have legal status.

More generally, employers lose their entitlement to capricious behaviour in 
relation to their property when they require others to access and use said 
property.

-- 
FERGUS O'ROURKE
www.irish-lawyer.com
(Not just law stuff)

chris wrote:
> Thanks for the replys,
>                           First of all we have a good union  and they say 
> that management absolutley cannot open up our lockers on a whim without 
> perfectly good reason. I agree if something had gone missing then if you had 
> nothing to hide then there shouldnt be any problem but some of these newly 
> appointed managers have introduced a whole new climate of awkwardness  in 
> the workplace , the reasons ? well only they can tell. These beat up old 
> lockers are not a privelige believe me. we are not contractually obliged to 
> have our lockers inspected when these managers feel like it neither. I 
> suppose if they feel that its their storage facility and they have every 
> right i think I will leave every bit of stuff in a large suitcase by my 
> locker and they can go and get stuffed I suppose
> 
>                                             Chris

Good luck, however it is their storage space and even if it isn't 
explicitly in the contract they can inspect them or withdraw the 
facility (unless the contract actually makes it private).

They may feel it is their facility and they are right in that.  Just as 
they can stipulate how they use that storage they can also dictate what 
or where you store in their building and if they have any sense they 
will invoke their right to remove suitcases they don't want.

That said, there is no reason why this can't be done with a bit of 
sensitivity.

In message , at 15:40:18 on Fri, 4 
Jul 2008, Fergus O'Rourke  remarked:
>>> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
>>> equipment (such as cars for example).
>>
>> I briefly worked at a factory where employee's cars were routinely
>> searched as they left the premises.
>
>Were there circumstances making this a reasonable routine ?

The factory made video recorders, and there was a possibility that some 
might have otherwise left in dubious circumstances. It's a bit like some 
cash-handling jobs where they don't let you take your own cash onto the 
premises (and I presume they search people going out).
-- 
Roland Perry

Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
> Dave wrote:
>> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle
>>> management to routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the
>>> employment contract says so or not.
>>>
>>> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these
>>> searches, but if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a
>>> different kettle of fish.
>> What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage
>> property ?
> 
> The laws of contract and tort.

Actually those laws don't necessarily prevent it.  They may prevent it.

>> It is entirely reasonable.
> 
> Why ?

In order to check how their property is being used, how it is being 
treated and what it is used for.

>> The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.
> 
> Who said that it was a privilege ?

The recognition that employees are perfectly at liberty to make their 
own alternative arrangements for the storage of their personal property 
along with the fact that provision of the facility is voluntary makes it 
a privilege.

>> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
>> equipment (such as cars for example).
> 
> Policies do not necessarily have legal status.
> 
> More generally, employers lose their entitlement to capricious behaviour in 
> relation to their property when they require others to access and use said 
> property.
> 

But they don't require it.  They allow it in order to help their 
employees.  It is not part of the job and it doesn't become part of the 
job just because the employees are not permitted to take their 
possessions into other parts of the premises.

They haven't behaved capriciously.  Insensitively maybe.

On 3 Jul, 20:50, "chris"  wrote:
> Hello Group,
>                   Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over
> zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff into
> opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate
> inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do
> contain family photosand personal possessions  etc. These searches are
> completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our  right
> to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.
>
>                                                Cheers
>                                                   Chris

Normally, an employer has a right to stop and search, or to search
desks, offices, lockers etc, only if it is
specifically in your contract of employment. (Usually, either the
contract or the employees handbook should clearly state who has the
authority, when, where, and in what circumstances.)  Most such
specific contract terms also warn that refusal will be a serious
disciplinary breach, and the employer can then act accordingly.

(Sometimes the fact that employers are known to search can itself mean
e.g.'lockers do not contain anything inapropriate
 ever'. ie, it has the effect of deterring rather than detecting.)

Toom

Thanks all,

            In a nutshell certain managers who have been overlooked for 
available promotion have now took it upon themselves to search employees 
lockers in the desperate hope of finding just about anything that they can 
manipulate into being in conravention to our code of discipline and I really 
mean anything.They feel that they are number one in the organisation and the 
fact that if they do find the slightest ambigious thing they cause an 
investigation and then their names are up in lights again regardless of 
anyone who has worked there for the last 25 years getting the sack for 
nothing.
However it looks likewe dont stand a chance

                                        Chris


"Toom Tabard"  wrote in message 
news:aef73ffa-ae5c-40ea-be62-867896b74a2e@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On 3 Jul, 20:50, "chris"  wrote:
> Hello Group,
> Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over
> zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff 
> into
> opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate
> inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do
> contain family photosand personal possessions etc. These searches are
> completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our right
> to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.
>
> Cheers
> Chris

Normally, an employer has a right to stop and search, or to search
desks, offices, lockers etc, only if it is
specifically in your contract of employment. (Usually, either the
contract or the employees handbook should clearly state who has the
authority, when, where, and in what circumstances.)  Most such
specific contract terms also warn that refusal will be a serious
disciplinary breach, and the employer can then act accordingly.

(Sometimes the fact that employers are known to search can itself mean
e.g.'lockers do not contain anything inapropriate
 ever'. ie, it has the effect of deterring rather than detecting.)

Toom

On Fri,  4 Jul 2008 15:15:19 +0100, Roland Perry put finger to
keyboard and typed:

>In message <486e0cf6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk>, at 12:50:08 on Fri, 4 Jul 
>2008, Dave  remarked:
>>Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees' 
>>equipment (such as cars for example).
>
>I briefly worked at a factory where employee's cars were routinely 
>searched as they left the premises.

Where I work, we are subject to random car and/or bag checks on
leaving the premises. This is a requirement imposed by the company's
insurers, as there is a large quantity of expensive items of hardware
on the premises which could easily be removed by dishonest staff (or,
for that matter, visitors) in the absence of any such safegards. I
don't know if staff lockers are subject to the same process of random
checks, as I didn't take up the offer of being allocated one (I'm
sufficiently far up the corporate ladder that my desk is big enough
for anything I need to keep at work), but it wouldn't surprise me if
that was the case.

Mark

"chris"  wrote in message 
news:pgtbk.178602$NN3.90973@newsfe08.ams2...
> Thanks all,
>
>            In a nutshell certain managers who have been overlooked for
> available promotion have now took it upon themselves to search employees
> lockers in the desperate hope of finding just about anything that they can
> manipulate into being in conravention to our code of discipline and I 
> really
> mean anything.They feel that they are number one in the organisation and 
> the
> fact that if they do find the slightest ambigious thing they cause an
> investigation and then their names are up in lights again regardless of
> anyone who has worked there for the last 25 years getting the sack for
> nothing.
> However it looks likewe dont stand a chance
>
>



How you can say that after reading me and - even more so - TT below, baffles 
me.

What about your union - are they not prepared to challenge it ?




>
>
> "Toom Tabard"  wrote in message
> news:aef73ffa-ae5c-40ea-be62-867896b74a2e@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On 3 Jul, 20:50, "chris"  wrote:
>> Hello Group,
>> Can anyone furnish me with any legal ammo against over
>> zelous managers in my place of work who constantly try and bully staff
>> into
>> opening their personal lockers to see if there is anything inapropriate
>> inside. These lockers do not contain anything inapropriate ever, they do
>> contain family photosand personal possessions etc. These searches are
>> completly random and it seems to me that it is an infringment of our 
>> right
>> to privacy however I need something to come back at them with.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Chris
>
> Normally, an employer has a right to stop and search, or to search
> desks, offices, lockers etc, only if it is
> specifically in your contract of employment. (Usually, either the
> contract or the employees handbook should clearly state who has the
> authority, when, where, and in what circumstances.)  Most such
> specific contract terms also warn that refusal will be a serious
> disciplinary breach, and the employer can then act accordingly.
>
> (Sometimes the fact that employers are known to search can itself mean
> e.g.'lockers do not contain anything inapropriate
> ever'. ie, it has the effect of deterring rather than detecting.)
>
> Toom
>
>

"Dave"  wrote in message 
news:486e41e6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk...
> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
>> Dave wrote:
>>> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle
>>>> management to routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the
>>>> employment contract says so or not.
>>>>
>>>> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these
>>>> searches, but if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a
>>>> different kettle of fish.
>>> What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage
>>> property ?
>>
>> The laws of contract and tort.
>
> Actually those laws don't necessarily prevent it.  They may prevent it.

Fair enough, I agree


>>> It is entirely reasonable.
>>
>> Why ?
>
> In order to check how their property is being used, how it is being 
> treated and what it is used for.

That is unlikely to be reasonable absent any evidence of abuse, but it 
depends very much on the surrounding circumstances.

>>> The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.
>>
>> Who said that it was a privilege ?
>
> The recognition that employees are perfectly at liberty to make their own 
> alternative arrangements for the storage of their personal property along 
> with the fact that provision of the facility is voluntary makes it a 
> privilege.

Victorian attitude IMHO.

>>> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
>>> equipment (such as cars for example).
>>
>> Policies do not necessarily have legal status.
>>
>> More generally, employers lose their entitlement to capricious behaviour 
>> in relation to their property when they require others to access and use 
>> said property.
>>
>
> But they don't require it.  They allow it in order to help their 
> employees.  It is not part of the job and it doesn't become part of the 
> job just because the employees are not permitted to take their possessions 
> into other parts of the premises.

We are not on same wavelength.

> They haven't behaved capriciously.
[snip]

How can you say that ? Do you know that it was more than caprice ?

I am not asserting that the behaviour was capricious, but that your position 
(AIUI) that the employer can behave as capriciously as he likes because he 
owns the property is unsustainable.

Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
> "Dave"  wrote in message 
> news:486e41e6$1@mail.hmgcc.gov.uk...
>> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
>>> Dave wrote:
>>>> Fergus O'Rourke wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>> Just because the employer owns the lockers does not entitle
>>>>> management to routinely infringe reasonable privacy, whether the
>>>>> employment contract says so or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am presuming that there is no pretext whatsoever for these
>>>>> searches, but if, for example, stuff is disappearing, it might be a
>>>>> different kettle of fish.
>>>> What prevents management checking the contents of their own storage
>>>> property ?
>>> The laws of contract and tort.
>> Actually those laws don't necessarily prevent it.  They may prevent it.
> 
> Fair enough, I agree
> 
> 
>>>> It is entirely reasonable.
>>> Why ?
>> In order to check how their property is being used, how it is being 
>> treated and what it is used for.
> 
> That is unlikely to be reasonable absent any evidence of abuse, but it 
> depends very much on the surrounding circumstances.
> 
>>>> The employees may well find that the locker privilege is withdrawn.
>>> Who said that it was a privilege ?
>> The recognition that employees are perfectly at liberty to make their own 
>> alternative arrangements for the storage of their personal property along 
>> with the fact that provision of the facility is voluntary makes it a 
>> privilege.
> 
> Victorian attitude IMHO.
> 
>>>> Many companies have policies of checking the contents of employees'
>>>> equipment (such as cars for example).
>>> Policies do not necessarily have legal status.
>>>
>>> More generally, employers lose their entitlement to capricious behaviour 
>>> in relation to their property when they require others to access and use 
>>> said property.
>>>
>> But they don't require it.  They allow it in order to help their 
>> employees.  It is not part of the job and it doesn't become part of the 
>> job just because the employees are not permitted to take their possessions 
>> into other parts of the premises.
> 
> We are not on same wavelength.
> 
>> They haven't behaved capriciously.
> [snip]
> 
> How can you say that ? Do you know that it was more than caprice ?
> 
> I am not asserting that the behaviour was capricious, but that your position 
> (AIUI) that the employer can behave as capriciously as he likes because he 
> owns the property is unsustainable.

The point that an employer can impose wide ranging conditions on the use 
of equipment which does not form part of the job or equipment necessary 
to facilitate or do the job and which they are under no obligation in 
any context to provide is entirely sustainable.

Whether it is good management is an entirely different question.

On 4 Jul, 15:50, Dave  wrote:
> chris wrote:
> > Thanks for the replys,
> >                           First of all we have a good union  and they say
> > that management absolutley cannot open up our lockers on a whim without
> > perfectly good reason. I agree if something had gone missing then if you had
> > nothing to hide then there shouldnt be any problem but some of these newly
> > appointed managers have introduced a whole new climate of awkwardness  in
> > the workplace , the reasons ? well only they can tell. These beat up old
> > lockers are not a privelige believe me. we are not contractually obliged to
> > have our lockers inspected when these managers feel like it neither. I
> > suppose if they feel that its their storage facility and they have every
> > right i think I will leave every bit of stuff in a large suitcase by my
> > locker and they can go and get stuffed I suppose
>
> >                                             Chris
>
> Good luck, however it is their storage space and even if it isn't
> explicitly in the contract they can inspect them or withdraw the
> facility (unless the contract actually makes it private).
>

Not if it is a locker for the personal secure use of the employee. The
consensus view and practice of employers associations, security firms
and employment lawyers is that a personal locker cannot be subject to
routine or random search unless the right to do so is in the contract
or employment handbook. If it isn't in the contract then the employee
can refuse, and any disciplinary action against the employee would
probably be deemed unfair. It would breach the general principles
governing surveillance in the workplace, and may be a breach of right
to  privacy under the Human Rights Act. Only if the right to search is
in the contract can any refusal to allow such searches be reliably
deemed a breach of contract.

Toom

Toom Tabard wrote:
> On 4 Jul, 15:50, Dave  wrote:
>> chris wrote:
>>> Thanks for the replys,
>>>                           First of all we have a good union  and they say
>>> that management absolutley cannot open up our lockers on a whim without
>>> perfectly good reason. I agree if something had gone missing then if you had
>>> nothing to hide then there shouldnt be any problem but some of these newly
>>> appointed managers have introduced a whole new climate of awkwardness  in
>>> the workplace , the reasons ? well only they can tell. These beat up old
>>> lockers are not a privelige believe me. we are not contractually obliged to
>>> have our lockers inspected when these managers feel like it neither. I
>>> suppose if they feel that its their storage facility and they have every
>>> right i think I will leave every bit of stuff in a large suitcase by my
>>> locker and they can go and get stuffed I suppose
>>>                                             Chris
>> Good luck, however it is their storage space and even if it isn't
>> explicitly in the contract they can inspect them or withdraw the
>> facility (unless the contract actually makes it private).
>>
> 
> Not if it is a locker for the personal secure use of the employee. The
> consensus view and practice of employers associations, security firms
> and employment lawyers is that a personal locker cannot be subject to
> routine or random search unless the right to do so is in the contract
> or employment handbook. If it isn't in the contract then the employee
> can refuse, and any disciplinary action against the employee would
> probably be deemed unfair. It would breach the general principles
> governing surveillance in the workplace, and may be a breach of right
> to  privacy under the Human Rights Act. Only if the right to search is
> in the contract can any refusal to allow such searches be reliably
> deemed a breach of contract.
> 
> Toom
> 

Or on the other hand may not be ...

Similarly there are other arguments which could be put forward 
concluding that the employer would be in breach of statutory obligations 
by not checking and being aware of the contents of the lockers.

Principles and practices are fine but there isn't a concrete legal 
reason why the employer can't do this.  As always, there is a risk that 
somebody may come up with an indirect argument which will be successful.

On 6 Jul, 07:10, Dave  wrote:
> Toom Tabard wrote:
> > On 4 Jul, 15:50, Dave  wrote:
> >> chris wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the replys,
> >>>                           First of all we have a good union  and they say
> >>> that management absolutley cannot open up our lockers on a whim without
> >>> perfectly good reason. I agree if something had gone missing then if you had
> >>> nothing to hide then there shouldnt be any problem but some of these newly
> >>> appointed managers have introduced a whole new climate of awkwardness  in
> >>> the workplace , the reasons ? well only they can tell. These beat up old
> >>> lockers are not a privelige believe me. we are not contractually obliged to
> >>> have our lockers inspected when these managers feel like it neither. I
> >>> suppose if they feel that its their storage facility and they have every
> >>> right i think I will leave every bit of stuff in a large suitcase by my
> >>> locker and they can go and get stuffed I suppose
> >>>                                             Chris
> >> Good luck, however it is their storage space and even if it isn't
> >> explicitly in the contract they can inspect them or withdraw the
> >> facility (unless the contract actually makes it private).
>
> > Not if it is a locker for the personal secure use of the employee. The
> > consensus view and practice of employers associations, security firms
> > and employment lawyers is that a personal locker cannot be subject to
> > routine or random search unless the right to do so is in the contract
> > or employment handbook. If it isn't in the contract then the employee
> > can refuse, and any disciplinary action against the employee would
> > probably be deemed unfair. It would breach the general principles
> > governing surveillance in the workplace, and may be a breach of right
> > to  privacy under the Human Rights Act. Only if the right to search is
> > in the contract can any refusal to allow such searches be reliably
> > deemed a breach of contract.
>
> > Toom
>
> Or on the other hand may not be ...
>
> Similarly there are other arguments which could be put forward
> concluding that the employer would be in breach of statutory obligations
> by not checking and being aware of the contents of the lockers.
>
> Principles and practices are fine but there isn't a concrete legal
> reason why the employer can't do this.  As always, there is a risk that
> somebody may come up with an indirect argument which will be successful.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

True, but what I've stated is the current accepted legal view and
practice. I'm not aware of any case or principle which would support
your very definite statement "it is their storage space and even if it
isn't explicitly in the contract they can inspect them or withdraw the
facility (unless the contract actually makes it private)", though I
would be interested if you could point me to any sources of
information which support this.