WA state audiotaping in the workplace....legal?

[Rockstar0]

Hello, I worked for a small company where at 2AM on Feb 19th, I was involved in a 'profesional disagreement' with another employee. No customers or other employees were in the building except for the 2 of us. The only other employee on site was in his car, asleep. The employee I had the disagreement with is currently sueing the company we work for over matters that do not involve me in any way. His suit was filed at least 1-2 months prior to our disagreement.

The next day I was called by my employer & was told that the person I had my disagreement with had filed a complaint with the company & that after reviewing the video & audio tapes they were firing me due to the 'vulger & threatening statements' allegedly made in it. In addition, he stated that the company's legal crew had advised them to terminate all profesional relations with me to prevent inflaming the lawsuit the other part already had in process. I filed for unemployment & the company is attempting to block benefits. I sent to the unemployment office a few case files & statutes I found online claiming that in the state of WA, it is illegal to audio tape a conversation in private or in the workplace without all parties being made aware of the taping, which did not occur. From what I understand, that makes the occurance a violation of my 4th amendment rights. Both myself & the other party asked the worker in his car who was sleeping if he had heard the 'profesional disagreement' & he told us both that he had not heard any part of it.

WA state, King County, Seattle

Ok, all that being said once the documents I had found as well as a summary of the situation was submitted to the state unemployment office as well as the state attorney general office, a few weeks later the company suddenly is claiming they have a witness to the 'profesional disagreement' that they had not claimed they had before. I need to know teh following things please:

1. Would the audio taping of the workplace without disclosing the fact to all parties involved in a conversation within WA state be illegal & if yes, what is the violation (statute info if possible please)?

2. Would my being terminated under these circumstance constitute a wrongful termination?

3. Could I be charged for verbal assault? Note: The claim is that vulgar language & threats were issued by me to the other party. No theratening gestures or weapons involved.

4. If yes, is their a statute of limitations on such a charge? Note: This allegedly occured on Feb 19, 2010. As far as I am aware, no complaint has been made to local authorities & no authorities have made any attempt to contact me.

Any advice & /or information is greatly appreciated.

 

[army judge]

Hello, I worked for a small company where at 2AM on Feb 19th, I was involved in a 'profesional disagreement' with another employee. No customers or other employees were in the building except for the 2 of us. The only other employee on site was in his car, asleep. The employee I had the disagreement with is currently sueing the company we work for over matters that do not involve me in any way. His suit was filed at least 1-2 months prior to our disagreement.

The next day I was called by my employer & was told that the person I had my disagreement with had filed a complaint with the company & that after reviewing the video & audio tapes they were firing me due to the 'vulger & threatening statements' allegedly made in it. In addition, he stated that the company's legal crew had advised them to terminate all profesional relations with me to prevent inflaming the lawsuit the other part already had in process. I filed for unemployment & the company is attempting to block benefits. I sent to the unemployment office a few case files & statutes I found online claiming that in the state of WA, it is illegal to audio tape a conversation in private or in the workplace without all parties being made aware of the taping, which did not occur. From what I understand, that makes the occurance a violation of my 4th amendment rights. Both myself & the other party asked the worker in his car who was sleeping if he had heard the 'profesional disagreement' & he told us both that he had not heard any part of it.

WA state, King County, Seattle

Ok, all that being said once the documents I had found as well as a summary of the situation was submitted to the state unemployment office as well as the state attorney general office, a few weeks later the company suddenly is claiming they have a witness to the 'profesional disagreement' that they had not claimed they had before. I need to know teh following things please:

Okay, here is a little about the law of surreptitious recording of video or audio.
Washington is one of twelve states that require all parties to consent to the recording.

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.

All parties generally must consent to the interception or recording of any private communication, whether conducted by telephone, telegraph, radio or face-to-face, to comply with state law. Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030. The all-party consent requirement can be satisfied if "one party has announced to all other parties engaged in the communication or conversation, in any reasonably effective manner, that such communication or conversation is about to be recorded or transmitted." In addition, if the conversation is to be recorded, the requisite announcement must be recorded as well. Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030.

A party is determined to have consented to recording if he is aware that the recording is taking place. Washington v. Modica, 149 P.3d 446 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006).

Consent to recording of real-time conversation using online discussion software is implicit because participants know the conversations will be recorded on the other party's computer. Washington v. Townsend, 20 P.3d 1027 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).All parties generally must consent to the interception or recording of any private communication, whether conducted by telephone, telegraph, radio or face-to-face, to comply with state law. Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030. The all-party consent requirement can be satisfied if "one party has announced to all other parties engaged in the communication or conversation, in any reasonably effective manner, that such communication or conversation is about to be recorded or transmitted." In addition, if the conversation is to be recorded, the requisite announcement must be recorded as well. Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030.

A party is determined to have consented to recording if he is aware that the recording is taking place. Washington v. Modica, 149 P.3d 446 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006).

Consent to recording of real-time conversation using online discussion software is implicit because participants know the conversations will be recorded on the other party's computer. Washington v. Townsend, 20 P.3d 1027 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).

Regardless of the state, it is almost always illegal to record a conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent to tape, and could not naturally overhear.

Federal law and most state laws also make it illegal to disclose the contents of an illegally intercepted call or communication.

1. Would the audio taping of the workplace without disclosing the fact to all parties involved in a conversation within WA state be illegal & if yes, what is the violation (statute info if possible please)?

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030. There is various case law to support the statute. The penalty is irrelevant in your case. Your firing is alleged to have been attributed to the illicit recordings. That is all you need to prove to overcome the denial of benefits and maybe get your job back.

2. Would my being terminated under these circumstance constitute a wrongful termination?

Yes.

3. Could I be charged for verbal assault? Note: The claim is that vulgar language & threats were issued by me to the other party. No theratening gestures or weapons involved.

Don't be silly. There is no law prohibiting or defining "verbal assaults" per se. That is not to say that such conduct isn't prohibited by the employer on his premises.

4. If yes, is their a statute of limitations on such a charge? Note: This allegedly occured on Feb 19, 2010. As far as I am aware, no complaint has been made to local authorities & no authorities have made any attempt to contact me.

There would be, if such a law existed. You're worrying about something that can never happen.


I suggest you speak with an employment or labor lawyer.


You might have stumbled into a small mother lode.


http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/washington.html

 

[mightymoose]

You are arguing that you were unaware that there were security cameras in the building? Sorry, but I think you consented to being recorded every single day you came to work.... unless these cameras were hidden.

And Army... what the heck is a "small" mother lode??

 

[Rockstar0]

No, I understand fully that video taping of the office was legal....but audio taping is not.

 

[army judge]

No, I understand fully that video taping of the office was legal....but audio taping is not.

Video includes audio in most cases.
I see your argument, good luck using it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk