In California it would not be illegal so long as all parties were warned they were being recorded, but what he describes is illegal unless they are in a one party consent state.
> (a) A person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, uses an electronic amplifying or recording device to eavesdrop upon or record the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished...
(b) For the purposes of this section, “person” means an individual, business association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or recording the communication.
Can you maybe substantiate this a little? I don't understand why a company recording the meetings of their employees, on company time and regarding company business, would be illegal.
(An individual doing so, on the other hand, might be problematic.)
This would definitely be illegal in Germany where I work as CTO.
Even having employees sign some letter of acceptance of such would still be illegal as a court would assume an employee was in an uneven power position and therefore not able to refuse even if they wanted to.
> America's pretty much a third-world country when it comes to employee rights.
Nope, that's not true at all. Not to play the game of semantic-nazi, but that's legitimately offensive when you look at a "third-world" country's employee rights compared to the US.
I'll take you for a tour in Phnom Penh, Cambodia if you're interested in seeing what a "third-world" country's working conditions are really like.
> (a) A person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, uses an electronic amplifying or recording device to eavesdrop upon or record the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished...
(b) For the purposes of this section, “person” means an individual, business association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or recording the communication.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...