Meta’s smart glasses can film, photograph and send messages, all without anyone in the room realising it’s happening. As pubs, theatres and courts across the UK start banning them over privacy concerns, employers need to ask whether their own workplace is ready for wearable tech, and whether a policy is already overdue.
Employment lawyers are warning that smart glasses bring together three separate risks for employers: data protection, harassment, and disability discrimination. Here’s what you need to know.
Why Smart Glasses Are Making Employers Nervous
The core problem is confidentiality. Smart glasses make it far less obvious that someone is recording than a phone does, which means covert recordings of disciplinary hearings, grievance meetings and confidential conversations are harder to spot and harder to prevent.
This isn’t an entirely new issue. Employees have been covertly recording meetings on their phones for years, and employment tribunals will still accept that kind of evidence if a dispute escalates. What’s changed is how invisible the recording has become, and how much harder that makes it to run an open, trusted investigation.
There’s also a genuine data protection angle. Recordings and images captured on smart glasses may be disclosable in litigation, and employers need to think carefully about where that data goes, how it’s stored and who can access it, whether the concern is a data breach, a confidentiality leak or a harassment complaint. Without a formal BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) policy, employers cannot effectively track which devices access company data, implement mandatory security measures, manage lost or stolen devices, or ensure proper data segregation between personal and business content.
When Smart Glasses Could Create Risks
Smart glasses do not create an Equality Act harassment claim simply because a colleague feels watched or uncomfortable. For conduct to amount to harassment under the Equality Act 2010, it must be unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, or unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, and have the purpose or effect of violating dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The circumstances and whether it was reasonable for the conduct to have that effect also matter.
Smart glasses may be used legitimately to preserve evidence of threats, harassment or other inappropriate conduct, although any recording may still raise separate privacy, data protection or confidentiality issues. The harassment risk arises where the technology itself is misused; for example, where someone uses or threatens to use smart glasses to target a colleague because of a relevant protected characteristic, to capture or share racist, sexist or disability-related material, or as part of conduct of a sexual nature. Even where the Equality Act test is not met, covert or intrusive use may still amount to bullying or misconduct which an employer should address.
From 30 October 2026, employers will be required to take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment and will also face liability where they fail to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment by third parties, such as customers, clients and suppliers. These risks can extend beyond the office to work-related social events. A clear BYOD policy should therefore cover when devices may be worn or used, prohibit unauthorised recording, and explain how concerns will be handled.
Disability Discrimination: Why an Outright Ban Won’t Always Work
Smart glasses can genuinely help disabled workers. Features like real-time AI assistance, reading text aloud and hands-free messaging could count as a reasonable adjustment for staff with sight loss or other disabilities, something employers are legally required to consider.
That means a blanket ban is risky without a built-in exceptions process. If a worker can show that ordinary glasses or other technology wouldn’t achieve the same outcome, refusing to allow smart glasses as an adjustment could expose an employer to a disability discrimination claim.
There is a balance to be struck, as whilst smart glasses could provide a reasonable adjustment, they can also create privacy risks for individuals. Where employees capture recordings on personal devices, that has been agreed via an exception or BYOD policy, employers may inadvertently process personal data of third parties, such as other employees, customers, or visitors, who appear in the footage. How this data is managed is key.
The answer isn’t to allow free use. Employers can permit smart glasses as a reasonable adjustment while still applying guardrails, such as a strict no-recording rule, and can point to a less intrusive alternative (dictation software, for example) where one genuinely meets the same need.
What Employers Should Do Now
- Introduce or update your BYOD policy before an issue arises, rather than reacting after the fact.
- Require workers who record a workplace interaction to declare it and, where appropriate and lawful, provide a copy on request.
- Consider designated no-recording areas, such as meeting rooms, toilets and waiting areas.
- Build in a clear exceptions process for smart glasses used as a disability-related reasonable adjustment, with guardrails such as a no-recording condition attached.
- Train managers on how to respond to complaints about wearable tech and how to enforce your BYOD policy consistently and fairly.
The Bottom Line
Smart glasses are here, and they raise real questions around privacy, confidentiality, harassment and disability inclusion that a simple ban won’t resolve. Employers who set clear expectations now, and who are ready to enforce them, will be in a much stronger position if a dispute lands on their desk.
If you’d like help reviewing or drafting a BYOD policy for your business, get in touch with the team at Thrive Law.
Get in touch with the team at Thrive Law at enquiries@thrivelaw.co.uk or call 0113 869 8101.
