• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Hidden Camara - legal or not?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

yjkaries

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? NJ

Can an employer install hidden camaras, microphones etc. to spy on employees without them knowing? What about phone tapping? Is this an invasion of privacy? These camaras would be above person's desk, in common areas (lunch room)... I hope not in bathroom but who knows! Also, it would be "certain" employees and not all.

Small company - 1 owner - private - less than 30 people.
 


beckyb

Junior Member
yes they can -you have no expectation of privacy

they can install hidden cameras and there is probably a statement somewhere in your company's handbook or documentation stating that you have no expectation of privacy in communications, email, phone, etc. while using company resources. they cannot, however, install cameras where you do have an expectation of privacy such as a restroom.
 

beckyb

Junior Member
slight modification on the "some people not all"

still yes, unless it is based on a protected class of employee - i.e. if they think you are untrustworthy they can; if they install cameras to monitor employees based on gender, race, religion, disability, etc., that is discrimination and they cannot. also, if a single person (or group) is targeted following a protected action (you made a complaint of unsafe working conditions), and the installation of the camera could be shown to be retaliatory, they cannot.
 

Some Random Guy

Senior Member
What is the name of your state? NJ

Can an employer install hidden camaras, microphones etc. to spy on employees without them knowing? What about phone tapping? Is this an invasion of privacy?
Aside from any discrimination issues pointed out earlier, there can be significant issues with audio recording. If the phones are bing recorded, then the company should be informing all callers that their conversations may be recorded. Although new jersey is a one-party state for telephone recording, your company may get calls from out of state.

Likewise, all visitors to the building should be informed that they are under audio surveillance if they are allowed into areas where the microphones may be located.

This assumes that employees have been informed that they may be audo recorded while on-site. If they have, then their continued employment can be taken as an agreement to the taping. If the employees were not informed, then the employer will be violating the waretapping laws if they tape two employees conversing with each other or an employee talkig to a customer because neither party will have agreed to the taping.
 

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
Aside from any discrimination issues pointed out earlier, there can be significant issues with audio recording. If the phones are bing recorded, then the company should be informing all callers that their conversations may be recorded. Although new jersey is a one-party state for telephone recording, your company may get calls from out of state.

Likewise, all visitors to the building should be informed that they are under audio surveillance if they are allowed into areas where the microphones may be located.

This assumes that employees have been informed that they may be audo recorded while on-site. If they have, then their continued employment can be taken as an agreement to the taping. If the employees were not informed, then the employer will be violating the waretapping laws if they tape two employees conversing with each other or an employee talkig to a customer because neither party will have agreed to the taping.
Actually, under “Business extension” exception/”telephone extension” exception - New Jersey permits employers to monitor employee conversations if doing so is in the ordinary course of the employer’s business. See 18 U.S.C. § 2519(5); N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-4.

Requirements for the exception:

either the telephone company or the subscriber must furnish the intercepting telephone or telegraph instrument or equipment; and
the instrument or equipment must be used in the ordinary course of business. Pascale v. Carolina Freight Carriers, 898 F. Supp. 276 (D.N.J. 1995).

Based solely on the facts presented, there is no illegal activity happening here.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top