Staff meeting recording by employee.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I assume that you are either the employee or the employer. If not, post back because the answer may change.

If you are asking whether you'll get thrown in jail for doing so, no, you won't. MN law only requires that one party to the conversation be aware and consent to the taping.

However, on the assumption that you are the employee, know that just because the law won't take action against you doesn't mean your employer can't. If you do not have permission for the taping, you CAN be fired for doing so without permission and the firing will the quite legal, EVEN THOUGH you will not have violated any laws by doing so.
 
Can I legally record a staff meeting between employees and employer in the state of Minnesota?

Well,here's your problem, OP.

CBG, gave you very good advice.

I'll add, because you can do something, it doesn't mean you should.

I usually tell my clients, to take notes. That's a good way to remember and memorialize what was said.

In your post, you ask about recording employees and employer. That implies more than one employee will be present. Now, you need to be even more careful. I suggest not to record conversations. That's a sign of a broken down relationship. Maybe you'd be better off seeking new employment? Just a thought.

See an excerpt from a well written article on your query.



Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping. The more accurate term is "all-party consent."

The situation can get hairy when a person in a one-party consent state calls and records a conversation with a person in an all-party consent state, but does not get that person’s permission. There are several factors that go into which consent law applies. It is generally safer to assume that the stricter, all-party consent law will apply where either the caller or receiver is in an all-party state.

Often, notice will be considered sufficient to find consent. For example, when you call tech support for the laptop you just cannot figure out, the first thing you might hear is "this conversation may be recorded for quality assurance." Most courts hold that, if you speak after hearing this notice, you have given implied consent to the recording and cannot later maintain a civil suit.

There are a host of other exceptions based on legitimate business recordings, crime-tort exceptions, and exceptions for telephone companies. Those will have to wait for another episode.

An Answer

Returning to David’s question, the answer is that "it depends." First, the court would determine whether the resident could reasonably expect the conversations to be private given that they occur in a quasi-public place: at the front desk of a condominium complex. If the conversations are not considered private, then David may record. If they are considered private, then the court would determine whether proper consent would defeat the claim. If David lives in a one-party consent jurisdiction, then only he would need to consent to the recording, but he would need the resident's consent or knowledge in an all-party consent state.


Overall, be very careful before you record conversations with people. To be safe, always get the express consent of all parties to the conversation, and check with an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction to help you wade through these issues.

http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com/the-legality-of-recording-conversations.aspx


Sent from my iPad3 using Tapatalk HD
 
I am the employee. In past staff meetings I have been interrogated and defamed in front of all present. Unfortunately, or by design, our head director never attends these meetings. When I discuss this with the head director, she says she will look into it. The next day, I receive an e-mail stating what I have reported to her is inaccurate, regardless of my written notes.
I know I am in the right. If been in my field of work for over 25yrs. And though I've met with much contempt from a hand full of employees, the majority are aware of my skill and value. I work in the hospitality industry and am known throughout the city as a very pleasant and professional employee.
I am 47yrs old a family man, and live in the same house that I lived in during my elementary school years. Finding a new job, as Army Judge, below, has suggested, in the small but prominent city I live in, that will accommodate my wife's job and children's responsibilities, Is something I have not been able to do. Again 90% or more of the employees at my workplace absolutely love and respect me and my work ethic.
I am a male of mixed heritage. I take my job very seriously. Other than an occasional beer while eating spicy foods, I do not consume alcohol on or off the clock. The people whom have issue with me are caucasian, female, and are in, or related to, those in management. They openly consume and even brag about being intoxicated while in the workplace.
Also my father served in world war II, was a professional boxer and wrestler back when wrestling was real. He was also very active in state and local politics and was admired by all who knew him. So, I hope Army Judge understands why I have never considered my self a quitter or runner.

A side note. I never been questioned at, or fired from any establishment I've ever been employed.
 
The fact remains that while recording the staff meeting, unknown to anyone else and without permission, does not violate any MN or Federal laws, you are not protected from termination if your manager or the employer decides to take offense at your doing so. Your heritage, your father's history, and the fact that you have not been questioned or terminated (yet) does not change this. You CAN be fired and it WOULD be legal.

I don't know that they WOULD; I am explaining that they CAN.
 
No secrets

I would be stating , "I am using a voice recorder to take notes at this staff meeting this evening." I would then ask if anyone has any objections. I would then give my own consent, and request the consent of my personal staff, which I already know I would receive. I never said anything about doing any recording in secret. I apologize if I gave that impression.
I have no fear of losing my job. I'm just trying to keep my actions legal, as I am a city employee. My personal information has nothing to do with the legality of the situation. Nor, does it have to do with any concern of being fired. My statement was a simple insight to the fact that I was not raised to run from conflict, when I know I am in the right.
 
Nothing you've said above changes the answer. You CAN be fired for recording the meeting without permission, and I am not talking solely about permission of the participants in the meeting. It doesn't matter if it was done in the open or not; if your boss or his boss or the CEO decide to be offended by your use of a recording, then you CAN be fired for recording it, EVEN IF you had the permission of the participants in the meeting, EVEN IF you are entirely legal and EVEN IF you did so with the knowledge of everyone involved. Again, I am not saying you WILL be fired; I am saying you CAN be fired.

But it appears that you only want to hear that you are right, so fine, you are right.
 
OP, your initial question was "Can I legally record a staff meeting between employees and employer in the state of Minnesota." However, your last post implies that you want to know whether you have "a right" to unilaterally record staff meetings. The answer to that question is probably no. As a general matter, your supervisor (on behalf of your employer) can forbid you from recording a staff meeting, and you would not have any recourse or means to challenge his or her decision.

As a municipal employee, you may have rights under the civil service protection system and/or a collective bargaining agreement. While I doubt either civil service protection or a union contract would authorize you to record staff meetings, I have read seemingly crazier "worker protections." It may be worth it for you to examine whether you have any such rights.

Again, though, if you are not specifically granted such rights, then you likely do not have a basis to insist upon recording a staff meeting.
 
Mission completed

My original question was "Can I legally record a staff meeting between employees and employer in the state of Minnesota?"
I never asked if they could fire me. I have no concern whether or not they can legally fire me. I'm not sure how the topic of "legally recording" turned into "legally be fired".
The staff meeting has occurred, I stated I would be taking notes with a audio recorder. I was met with no objections.
All is well. Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top