Author Topic: Recording workplace conversation  (Read 1391 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 269,951
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,358
Recording workplace conversation
« on: December 05, 2018, 02:29:59 »
In case any readers get any ideas...all parties knew they were being recorded right?

I was under the impression in Canada its legal to video tape or record someone without their permission so long as one of the parties is aware they're being taped/recorded?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 07:34:30 by BeyondTheNow »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline BeyondTheNow

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 51,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
  • Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Re: Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2018, 07:14:40 »
I was under the impression in Canada its legal to video tape or record someone without their permission so long as one of the parties is aware they're being taped/recorded?

Hmmm, I know what you’re talking about...I can’t cite the specific CCC or give examples without looking it up though. But I know that what you mentioned refers to “private” conversation/communication and one-party consent. Is the workplace considered “private”, even if closed-door? I didn’t think it did, but could be wrong. The type of recording plays a factor also. There are many facets encompassed into what’s legal and not when recording (audio and/or video) to consider also. Someone else will have to confirm the specifics. I just have visions of some people taking it upon themselves to go crazy with the idea. (For example only: A very, very extreme case would be what happened at Toronto Denison. He knew he was recording, so did that make it legal?)
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 07:22:22 by BeyondTheNow »
"Stop worrying about getting back to who you were before it all went wrong. To heal is to understand that the person you've since become is the one who's most capable of doing whatever it is you were put here to do."~SR

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 488,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,879
    • The job.
Re: Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2018, 07:19:45 »
Hmmm, I know what you’re talking about...I can’t cite the specific CCC or give examples without looking it up though. But I know that what you mentioned refers to “private” conversation/communication and one-party consent. Is the workplace considered “private”, even if closed-door? I didn’t think it did, but could be wrong. The type of recording plays a factor also. There are many facets encompassed into what’s legal and not when recording (audio and/or video) to consider also. Someone else will have to confirm the specifics. I just have visions of some people taking it upon themselves to go crazy with the idea. (For example only: A very, very extreme case would be what happened at Toronto Denison. He knew he was recording, so did that make it legal?)

For reference to the discussion,

"Recording Conversations at Work – What You Need to Know"
http://stlawyers.ca/recording-conversations-work/
"Can your co-worker secretly record you?"


Edit for accuracy of quote. MM: I was modifying my post inbetween you composing yours and posting it. BTN
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 07:27:19 by BeyondTheNow »

Offline BeyondTheNow

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 51,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
  • Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Re: Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2018, 07:33:15 »
For reference to the discussion,

"Recording Conversations at Work – What You Need to Know"
http://stlawyers.ca/recording-conversations-work/
"Can your co-worker secretly record you?"

Thanks for the link MM. That now begs the question though—Hypothetically speaking: let’s say the 3rd party witness decides to take it upon themself to record the conversation...only they themself know...they are not “actively participating” in the conversation (their purpose there is to sit and listen only)...is it legal? My interpretation would be no.
"Stop worrying about getting back to who you were before it all went wrong. To heal is to understand that the person you've since become is the one who's most capable of doing whatever it is you were put here to do."~SR

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 488,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,879
    • The job.
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2018, 09:40:46 »
I was under the impression in Canada its legal to video tape or record someone without their permission so long as one of the parties is aware they're being taped/recorded?

Just don't get caught. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE8p7JKQ6PA

Not Suitable for Work ( NSFW )

WARNING: Foul Language.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 210,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,447
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2018, 10:25:40 »
This was part of the subjects that were covered on a course I took a few years back (Harassment Advisor).  The question came up "what if someone thinks they are being harassed and they record it;  can that recording be used?".  IIRC, the Area Comd's HA Policy SME and someone from the AJAG Office were present for this part of the curriculum. 

The answer given was, yes, but there are some stipulations:

- if a senior member is talking to a junior member, they are considered / acting as a representative of the government; they have no expectation of privacy in carrying out those duties and do not have to be told that they are being recorded by the junior member.

- if a senior member is talking to a junior member, they cannot record the conversation without informing the junior member they wish to record the conversation, and get the junior members consent.

It was also stated that this had already happened in both cases, and also that there was a few cases where a senior member recorded an interview/discussion with a junior member, the junior member was not told and the recording was destroyed and the senior member counselled. 

Not sure if this is still "current" in todays legal world.
Do I love my job?  No.

But does it afford me the ability to go on lavish vacations and buy anything I want?  Also no.

Online AbdullahD

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 18,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 378
Re: Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2018, 12:20:05 »
For reference to the discussion,

"Recording Conversations at Work – What You Need to Know"
http://stlawyers.ca/recording-conversations-work/
"Can your co-worker secretly record you?"


Edit for accuracy of quote. MM: I was modifying my post inbetween you composing yours and posting it. BTN

Thanks for that Mike.

We allegedly have a person at my workplace who likes to record conversations in order to further their own ends.

All of us pretty much know to ignore them and not chat with them, due to baiting, annoyance or what have you. But this little tid bit is helpful.

Thank you
Abdullah

P.s this is all just allegations so in case I'm wrong I did not want to do anything to smear their name. Hence why some awkward English in order to anonymize lol

Offline Cloud Cover

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 29,490
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,755
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2018, 12:30:20 »
Making recordings is becoming quite an issue in family law as well.  Many quarrelling spouses install hidden video cameras and recorders in houses, cars, etc. They record conversations between the other spouse and, for example, a close friend, a lawyer or financial planner, girlfriends/ boyfriends etc. In these situations, if the person who is conducting the recording is not an active participant, they may well face a boat load of trouble if they are discovered.
There is a civil motion coming to be heard by special appointment  where a woman was alone in a room viewing pornography and using dating site chat rooms on the internet was secretly videorecorded by her (female) spouse.  She had also had Skype conversations with her lawyer that were recorded. The method was a mini HD camera that resembled an iPad charger ( and functioned like one as well), except there was a pinhole camera installed in it. The camera had a micro SD card that recorded gigabytes of imagery.  The issue on motion is whether surreptiously monitoring by video camera a persons interactions on a computer terminal without their knowledge or consent  is an interception of a private communication and thus the tort of invasion of privacy. Should be interesting...
+600 « Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 12:48:58 by whiskey601 »

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 176,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,203
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2018, 13:17:13 »
Hell, a case like that could potentially be interception in the criminal sense. It’ll be interesting to hear how that goes.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 55,654
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,978
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2018, 14:48:11 »
- if a senior member is talking to a junior member, they cannot record the conversation without informing the junior member they wish to record the conversation, and get the junior members consent.

This part I don't understand. Why do they need the jr. members consent?

We can be ordered to perform recorded interviews, or participate in videos. Why can't we order a member to sit through a one-way coversation that is being recorded?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 22:12:55 by Lumber »
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 176,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,203
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2018, 16:31:47 »
This part I don't understand. Why do they need the jr. members consent?

In my situation, a junior officer filed a harassment complaint against their department head (HOD).The claim was utter bullshit; what the junior officer thought was harassment was being repeatedly told by everyone up his chain of command that he wasn't doing his job, that he had to follow orders, and that he was required to submit his excuses in writing. Some of this was explained to him in meetings, other times it was in emails. I read the emails and actually attended one of the meetings, and not once was he treated in an unfair or harassing manner. He was just a lazy sack of crap who didn't want to do his job and didn't like being told to smarten up.

So, now that the harassment complaint is in, the HOD is now "afraid" of the member taking further actions against them, but they are still required (on occasion) to meet with this member (related to this or not) in their office.

If before the meeting starts the HOD, to protect themselves, says "just so you are aware, I will be recording this conversation", are you saying the member can say "I do not consent", and then the conversation has to stop until the HOD stops recording? That doesn't make sense to me.

We can be ordered to perform recorded interviews, or participate in videos. Why can't we order a member to sit through a one-way coversation that is being recorded?

I would suggest the chain of command is going to want to seek a qualified legal opinion on this just to be on the safe side.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline SupersonicMax

    is back home.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 80,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,758
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2018, 18:56:53 »
If the department head is so worried about a harrasment complaint, he should bring a third party to meetings.  This way, there is a honest broker in the mix.
+300

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -3925.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 268,672
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,290
    • Army.ca
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #12 on: December 06, 2018, 11:59:13 »
There is also the reasonable expectation of privacy.

I cannot legally surveil my neighbors front door. That, by itself is illegal.

However, my camera, that captures my front door, also captures theirs. It is the only line of sight that works. In this case, it is not illegal, nor unexpected, to have their door included.

Inside my home, I have that reasonable expectation of privacy. The expectation that I can legally, say or do what I wish, without consent or overwatch, within the confines of my established abode.

Outside of my home, in public interactions, I don't have that expectation.
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 165,145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,834
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2018, 13:58:01 »
An interesting topic and probably one that requires some "official" policy, even if only at the local level.  While most references here touch mostly on possible Criminal Code offences and the like, the implication of Privacy Act and government security and records management procedures should probably be a primary focus.  While someone in the COC may want to record a conversation for "self-protection" with a troublesome subordinate, remember that by doing so the supervisor has created an official record and it must be maintained correctly.

(edited to add)

One example of an investigated complaint that resulted in in the CF being found at fault for improperly handling an audio recording.
https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/opc-actions-and-decisions/investigations/investigations-into-federal-institutions/2014-15/pa_20150210/
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 14:10:06 by Blackadder1916 »
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -3925.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 268,672
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,290
    • Army.ca
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2018, 15:07:06 »
If the recording is for protection, I'd simply tell the subordinate things are being recorded for clarity or ask if they mind the conversation being recorded.

If you are attempting to gain evidence, someone could possibly claim entrapment, depending on how your conversation and questions were framed.

Just because you are one party to the conversation and can record it legally, it's about what you do with it and how it was conducted that's going to count.
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline BeyondTheNow

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 51,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
  • Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2018, 16:57:28 »
Reading some of these comments has got me thinking, so FWIW here’s my feeling...

I didn’t join the military until my 30s. Civvie-side, I’ve been alone many times with males (and females) of equal and greater authority in all settings ranging from executive and legal offices to pro-longed, one-on-one shift work, including overnights. In my mid-twenties I encountered an on-going situation where I was blatantly sexually harassed by my boss (encompassing sexual language and touching). I didn’t report the incidents to anyone other than my SO at the time, because I simply didn’t want to deal with the drama (which would no doubt ensue) and I switched jobs instead. He’s since kicked the bucket.

In the military, I’ve never been in a situation where sexual harassment was even remotely a problem. (Again, I’ve been in a variety of settings with male and female members of equal and/or greater rank, often one-on-one.) However, blantant bullying and intimidation was an issue with one out-ranking mbr/supervisor early on after joining. At the advice of a padre I decided to place a complaint. All proper channels were followed. There were many witnesses to multiple events, and fellow mbrs provided statements as well. I was legitimately fearful for the safety of my career and person, due to the affect on my mental health at the time. Even after the mbr was aware I had placed a complaint against them, they continued to try and engage me alone. I requested that a 3rd party be present if they had anything to say to me. The mbr then had a Sgt sit in, at which time the mbr proclaimed I was “...silly for making a Sgt waste their own time listening to the conversation...”

When the problems initially started, I began taking detailed notes citing names, dates, times and circumstances surrounding all problematic encounters/communication  with this mbr. In the end, perhaps the mbr may have gotten a slap on the wrist, but I don’t know.  (Rumours were always circulating that the mbr had multiple complaints against them, but it was all rumour. It was time for posting and no one followed up with resolutions.)

Anyway, I have 2 points:

A) It’s certainly not only a matter of the occasional problem-junior rank/officer causing problems for senior rank/officer due to improper/unacceptable behaviour, manipulation, false-accusations, etc etc—it goes both ways.

B) During any difficult circumstances I’ve encountered civvie-side or while serving, I haven’t felt the need to have (or want) to record conversations, even when feeling my most vulnerable.

I’m in no way discounting or trying to downplay how a mbr may be feeling in wanting to make sure there’s an accurate record of an ongoing problematic and/or threatening situation, but I’m having a difficult time relating to needing a legitimate justification for a recording. Make sure an objective 3rd party, or more, is present. If one isn’t available and it’s crucial, delay the meeting and make sure involved parties are aware of why there’s a delay. (i.e. we’ll discuss this matter when a witnessing member can be present.)
« Last Edit: December 06, 2018, 17:14:14 by BeyondTheNow »
"Stop worrying about getting back to who you were before it all went wrong. To heal is to understand that the person you've since become is the one who's most capable of doing whatever it is you were put here to do."~SR

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 176,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,203
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2018, 21:40:32 »
If the recording is for protection, I'd simply tell the subordinate things are being recorded for clarity or ask if they mind the conversation being recorded.

If you are attempting to gain evidence, someone could possibly claim entrapment, depending on how your conversation and questions were framed.

Just because you are one party to the conversation and can record it legally, it's about what you do with it and how it was conducted that's going to count.

I see where you’re going with this but you’re sort of off. ‘Entrapment’ is basically when law enforcement lures/tricks/entices someone into committing an offense they would not otherwise have done. Recording a conversation isn’t that. Any deception that does or doesn’t occur isn’t really dependent on the fact that it’s being recorded.Eliciting a confession to an offense already committed isn’t entrapment, and authorities are allowed with certain limitations to use some deception to do this... But we’re going down a pretty tangential rabbit hole at this point.

From an evidentiary standpoint, a military superior who suspects an offense and is attempting to elicit evidence of the offense from the suspect by way of statement/conversation should properly be giving them a Charter caution, otherwise any evidence gained by that statement could be argued inadmissible as well as potentially anything further derived from same- ‘fruit of the poison tree’ as it were. But even at that it won’t be recorded vs unrecorded that really matters, but rather what your intent was and whether the individual was clearly made aware of their Charter rights.

The most likely realistic concern regarding a superior single-party consent recording a conversation was brought up earlier, and that’s that a person acting in their official capacity is creating an official record that becomes subject to ATIP and must be retained appropriately.

Separately we may have military orders or regulations that also touch on this and of which I’m not aware offhand, hence my earlier suggestion to seek legal advice.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    MSC -3925.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 268,672
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,290
    • Army.ca
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2018, 22:28:23 »
I see where you’re going with this but you’re sort of off. ‘Entrapment’ is basically when law enforcement lures/tricks/entices someone into committing an offense they would not otherwise have done. Recording a conversation isn’t that. Any deception that does or doesn’t occur isn’t really dependent on the fact that it’s being recorded.Eliciting a confession to an offense already committed isn’t entrapment, and authorities are allowed with certain limitations to use some deception to do this... But we’re going down a pretty tangential rabbit hole at this point.

From an evidentiary standpoint, a military superior who suspects an offense and is attempting to elicit evidence of the offense from the suspect by way of statement/conversation should properly be giving them a Charter caution, otherwise any evidence gained by that statement could be argued inadmissible as well as potentially anything further derived from same- ‘fruit of the poison tree’ as it were. But even at that it won’t be recorded vs unrecorded that really matters, but rather what your intent was and whether the individual was clearly made aware of their Charter rights.

The most likely realistic concern regarding a superior single-party consent recording a conversation was brought up earlier, and that’s that a person acting in their official capacity is creating an official record that becomes subject to ATIP and must be retained appropriately.

Separately we may have military orders or regulations that also touch on this and of which I’m not aware offhand, hence my earlier suggestion to seek legal advice.

Yup, you're right. Entrapment was the wrong word. I should have said set up or something along that line. I also got too far into the weeds with the whole topic, making it not so easy to follow.
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline BeyondTheNow

  • Directing Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 51,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 897
  • Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Re: Recording workplace conversation
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2018, 09:31:47 »
Although a much different invironment, this article was interesting and somewhat relevant. The explanation that the nurse provides to the undercover female is very similar to what some posters have used as rationale in this thread.

This also not only draws attention to the point made of what type of recording is being done, but also the point of ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ under certain circumstances.

Since the offices were unarguably recording people without their knowledge/consent (whereas other types of similar practices had their patients complete waivers/forms), I can’t see this going well for that Dr.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-breast-implant-cameras-1.4944628

Quote
...Later, when the nurse entered the room, she said the camera was "just a security camera, basically."

"It's to protect you, too" she said. "And him. Like if someone ever said something happened and it didn't. Or stuff like that."

When asked if that has happened before, the nurse replied: "No, never."...

...Informed, voluntary consent

Brian Beamish, the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, called the situation "unacceptable" and "intrusive," saying it was the first he had heard of a camera being used for surveillance in an examination room. 

Physicians using cameras for surveillance rather than strictly clinical purposes is "unjustified and would likely be a breach of our privacy law," he said...
"Stop worrying about getting back to who you were before it all went wrong. To heal is to understand that the person you've since become is the one who's most capable of doing whatever it is you were put here to do."~SR