1

My work has a policy that when using company property, there is no expectation of privacy. Does this amount to blanket consent? This is in the state of California so unsure if this policy conflicts with state law.

1

Does this amount to blanket consent?

Not exactly. Instead, the policy precludes the prohibition in section 632 of the California Penal Code. The exact terms of the policy might bring up (or entail) a subtlety, but I'm answering based on the information you provide.

The California statute prohibits the recording of confidential communication [without the consent of all parties thereto]. But item (c) of that statute excludes from the definition of confidential communication those involving "any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded". In the context you mention, that circumstance could be a properly disclosed policy of no expectation of privacy.

| improve this answer | |
-1

This cannot be right

Such a policy would mean that you had no expectation of privacy in the bathroom - this clearly has no legal foundation. As such, the policy is fundamentally flawed.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    We don’t know enough about the policy to make this judgement, just a single sentence from the OP. – Moo Feb 21 at 8:38
  • @DaleM I know my comment on your answer will prompt you to downvote my answer, but the OP clearly is asking about recording conversations, not about recording the act of using a restroom for the physiological purposes of restrooms. – Iñaki Viggers Feb 21 at 9:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.