this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
121 points (96.9% liked)
Not The Onion
11891 readers
98 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why on earth would they put cameras in locker rooms?! That vague “safety and security” Is not going to cut it as an acceptable reason.
This wouldn’t fly as a reason to put cameras in women’s locker room, and it shouldn’t fly as a reason to put on in men’s, either.
Well they are testing it in men's... I am sure women will need safety and security too!
Won’t somebody think of the women?
I’m assuming there’s either stealing issues, or some form of harassment happening.
Doesn’t matter, the camera is passive and not going to correct whatever liability concern have; while introducing entirely new liability concerns…
They probably had some repeated instances of stealing and thought a $2000 security camera setup is cheaper than hiring more staff. I’m assuming they also can’t admit they have an issue with thieves because it could make them look bad?