By
When you enter a store’s
dressing room, do you assume you’re alone with your selection of clothes?
Don’t count on it.
As a theft prevention measure,
many retail stores use surveillance cameras to monitor dressing rooms. The
practice is on the rise, owing to improving technology, particularly the
availability of smaller, less expensive cameras.
Ever keen to catch a shopper
swapping tags or even bagging an item, retailers are going to greater
privacy-compromising lengths to protect their bottom line.
Why are they watching?
“Shrinkage,” a blanket
industry term referencing loss due to shoplifting and worker or vendor theft,
represents substantial annual loss to retailers. A 2015 report from
Retail Knowledge—producers of the largest risk and loss prevention conference
series in the world—identified that North American retailers lost about $60 billion that
year to shrinkage, up from $57 billion in 2014. A separate report from the
National Retail Federation arrived at a smaller but still
eye-popping estimate of shrinkage: 44 billion in 2014. And it cited shoplifting
as the number one culprit. Small wonder that retailers have placed surveillance
cameras throughout their stores, including the changing rooms.
How is that legal?
The legality of installing
cameras in dressing rooms depends upon which state the store in question is
located. In some states, it is perfectly legal to monitor a store’s dressing
room by surveillance camera or two-way mirror. In other states, the practice is
banned wholesale over privacy concerns.
The majority of states have taken
an “informed consent” approach: allowing changing-room surveillance but
requiring that the store post conspicuous signs in dressing room areas to
inform consumers that they are potentially being monitored. Some states permit
only real-time surveillance, via two-way mirrors or non-recorded camera feeds,
while others permit the use of cameras that record dressing room activity.
Only 13 states prohibit dressing room
surveillance without the expressed permission of the shopper: Alabama,
Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Michigan,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, South Dakota, and Utah.
Moreover, in every state,
video surveillance in sensitive areas, such as a dressing room or restroom, for
purposes other than theft prevention is illegal. Such conduct could fall under
laws prohibiting voyeurism, which is the act of recording unsuspecting
individuals (usually strangers) who may be naked or disrobing, for the purpose
of seeking sexual excitement.
It also potentially violates
laws on video voyeurism, which specifies the intent to capture an image of a
private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so
under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of
privacy. If you think you might have evidence that you have been videotaped for
purposes other than theft deterrence, you should contact a lawyer immediately, because
that’s never legal.
The ubiquity of retail surveillance
Make no mistake: in or out of
the dressing room, as soon as you walk in the store, you’re being watched. With
enhanced technology, you are a moving target for the retailer’s
digital eye, from the moment you enter a store until the moment you leave.
High-resolution video cameras
offer merchants “gaze trackers” that detect which brands you’re browsing and
for how long. Free in-store wifi allows retailers to track every time you
comparison-shop with a competitor. Stores also use your wifi connection to
create a “heat map” of your foot traffic—the better to organize displays. Even
your rewards card is a form of surveillance, tracking your every purchase and
exchange.
Still, many consumers who
don’t mind having their shopping patterns laid bare will balk at the retailer
who expects to see them do so literally. Given the size of shrinkage losses,
however, stores will continue to wage a battle against shoplifting using all
the tools at their disposal, including changing-room cameras (where legal).
Consumers have a voice in the
form of their dollars, and the option to spend them at stores that refuse to
employ dressing-room video surveillance. Growing consumer resistance to being
watched while changing could force retailers to shift their approach to
detecting and preventing theft. Other than that, your only recourse is to
either move to one of the states that prohibit the practice outright, or accept
a certain level of exposure—to privacy violations, as well as the unknown eyes
on the other side of the camera.
No comments:
Post a Comment