What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington State
If I've done my research correctly, Washington is a "Two-Party Consent" state in regards to voice recordings. I recently left a public organization (willfully) due to a hostile work environment and workplace bullying by my direct supervisor which was never adequately addressed by Human Resources or upper management. Aside from written documentation of numerous incidents, I often contemplated recording conversations with my supervisor without his/her consent. However, without an adequate understanding of the legalities of doing so, I never actually followed through. Several other individuals still employed with the organization under the same supervisor continue to experience bullying and workplace hostility / harassment, and I have considered suggesting that they record meetings and/or conversations with said supervisor.
If I understand correctly, any recording obtained without the consent of all parties involved probably wouldn't be admissible as evidence in a court of law should I/we/they decide to pursue litigation against the supervisor or the organization, and may even subject the recorder to possible litigation in return. However, certain factors confuse the issue for me, and I'm curious to know if they would change things. The organization in question is a public, tax-payer funded organization which receives a considerable amount of federal funds and is subject to public disclosure laws.
Here are my questions:
1. Would the organization's status as a public agency subject to public disclosure laws make any difference in this case?
2. If so, are there certain limitations? (i.e. Would a recording obtained during a private meeting conducted behind closed doors during regular business hours and on company time and property still be subject to the two-party consent law due to a reasonable expectation of privacy? Alternately, would a recording obtained within a common area, such as next to an employee's desk, where someone else could easily overhear anything being said technically be considered "public information", and be subject to public disclosure laws?)
3. If the organization's status as a public agency ultimately makes little or no difference regarding Washington's two-party consent law, are there any potential "loopholes" or other factors that could be taken into consideration?
Thank you in advance for taking the time to read through this, and for any response / advice.
If I've done my research correctly, Washington is a "Two-Party Consent" state in regards to voice recordings. I recently left a public organization (willfully) due to a hostile work environment and workplace bullying by my direct supervisor which was never adequately addressed by Human Resources or upper management. Aside from written documentation of numerous incidents, I often contemplated recording conversations with my supervisor without his/her consent. However, without an adequate understanding of the legalities of doing so, I never actually followed through. Several other individuals still employed with the organization under the same supervisor continue to experience bullying and workplace hostility / harassment, and I have considered suggesting that they record meetings and/or conversations with said supervisor.
If I understand correctly, any recording obtained without the consent of all parties involved probably wouldn't be admissible as evidence in a court of law should I/we/they decide to pursue litigation against the supervisor or the organization, and may even subject the recorder to possible litigation in return. However, certain factors confuse the issue for me, and I'm curious to know if they would change things. The organization in question is a public, tax-payer funded organization which receives a considerable amount of federal funds and is subject to public disclosure laws.
Here are my questions:
1. Would the organization's status as a public agency subject to public disclosure laws make any difference in this case?
2. If so, are there certain limitations? (i.e. Would a recording obtained during a private meeting conducted behind closed doors during regular business hours and on company time and property still be subject to the two-party consent law due to a reasonable expectation of privacy? Alternately, would a recording obtained within a common area, such as next to an employee's desk, where someone else could easily overhear anything being said technically be considered "public information", and be subject to public disclosure laws?)
3. If the organization's status as a public agency ultimately makes little or no difference regarding Washington's two-party consent law, are there any potential "loopholes" or other factors that could be taken into consideration?
Thank you in advance for taking the time to read through this, and for any response / advice.
