Initiative combines more day-to-day communication with the knowledge of the sellers; But what about the right of exposure of these professionals and what are the potential risks?
It is increasingly common for brands, especially those linked to retail, to use their own salespeople as influencers of products, offers and initiatives. It’s a little dance there, an offer ad there, and companies are looking for a closer and more affective connection with consumers.
A strategy that puts into practice both a more day-to-day communication of the business and the knowledge of sellers to explain products, launches and offers. In China, for example, many brands even use it in Liveshopping, a modality that is still in its infancy here. But how is the relationship with the right of exposure of these professionals and what are the potential risks for brands?
“What should happen as a rule is that this company must have an employment contract with detailed clarifications about the assignment of the employee’s image and voice for this type of activity”, says Marcelo Crespo, coordinator of the ESPM law course.
The contract, which has a civil nature, is different from that of work and must establish all the obligations negotiated between the parties for that disclosure, adds Carlos Eduardo Ambiel, professor of labor law at the FAAP University Center. “It is important that a specific contract be made with the seller, providing for the way in which this disclosure will be made”, he adds.
An action that is valid both for content that brands make using the content of employees on their own official networks and for those that ask or demand that employees post on their personal networks. In this second case, defends the expert, a payment or some other type of advantage must be negotiated, such as a commission if the sale takes place from the link shared with the sellers.
“If there is no separation between the work and the exhibition on the networks, the seller may complain about the misuse of the image or their social networks by the employer, with the corresponding indemnification being charged. The judiciary may arbitrate compensation if the misuse of the employee’s assets is proven, if there is no adjustment or prior authorization “, reinforces the professor.
inalienable rights
Dânton Zanetti, lawyer and professor at the PUC-PR School of Law, recalls that the rights of name, voice, image and personal data are inalienable. Which is to say that the employee cannot be obliged to authorize the employer to exploit these attributes.
“In the event of misuse of an employee’s image, with the unauthorized exposure of their name, image, voice, or even in relation to the processing of their personal data, especially for advertising purposes, there is a risk of violation of these rights and, as a result, the filing of a labor lawsuit”, says the specialist, also coordinator of the postgraduate course in digital law at PUC-PR and member of the Digital Law Commission of OAB-PR.
He also warns that, for companies that do not take precautions and do not document the employee’s rights license, the end of the employee’s employment relationship can turn into a nightmare. Hence, the importance of paying extra attention when adopting this type of strategy which, although not new, can gain new contours and dimensions in the universe of social networks.
Even because it is not something new, according to the specialist, there are already several cases involving these rights related to exposure in the Labor Court and that have been creating jurisprudence so that brands and companies have to pay compensation when there is no authorization.
“In our experience, as examples of cases already judged by the Courts, we can mention cases in which photos of employees were used without their knowledge or authorization for promotional purposes, institutional videos recorded with employee testimonials, linking the name of employees in news, posts or commercial actions”, he adds.
