Yes. Workplace surveillance can sometimes be used against California employees when an employer relies on lawfully collected information to investigate misconduct, enforce workplace rules, review performance, or support discipline. That does not give an employer unlimited authority to monitor you or to use surveillance for an unlawful reason.
California workers have privacy protections under the California Constitution, state recording laws, employment laws, and data privacy rules. The result often depends on what was monitored, where the monitoring occurred, whether you received notice, whether you had a reasonable expectation of privacy, why the employer collected the information, and how the employer used it.
If monitoring begins or becomes more intense after you report discrimination, unpaid wages, harassment, safety concerns, suspected legal violations, or other protected activity, the surveillance itself may become relevant evidence in a retaliation claim.
The Myers Law Group represents California employees in disputes involving retaliation, wrongful termination, whistleblowing, discrimination, wage claims, and related workplace issues.
https://www.myerslawgroup.com/california-employment-law-attorneys/
Managing Partner Attorney Attorney Attorney Attorney Attorney Attorney Attorney Attorney
David P. Myers
Adam N. Stern
Ann Hendrix
Robert Kitson
Justin Crane
Doug Smith
Jason Hatcher
Morgan J. Good
Alvin Ferrara
What Counts as Workplace Surveillance?
Workplace surveillance can include far more than a security camera near an entrance. Employers may collect information through tools such as:
- Security cameras in offices, warehouses, stores, common areas, and parking areas
• Company email, messaging systems, and browser logs
• Badge-access and timekeeping systems
• GPS or location data from company equipment
• Business call monitoring or recording
• Screenshots, keystroke tracking, or productivity software
• Company-issued phones, laptops, and mobile applications
• Automated systems that score productivity, attendance, or workplace activity
An employer may have a legitimate business reason to monitor some work activity. Common reasons include workplace security, theft prevention, safety, quality control, regulatory compliance, and protection of company systems.
You should not assume that activity on a company device is private. A written monitoring or computer-use policy can reduce your reasonable expectation of privacy. A policy does not automatically make every form of surveillance lawful.
California Employees Have Privacy Rights at Work
The California Constitution recognizes privacy as an inalienable right. California courts have treated privacy claims as highly dependent on context. Questions can include whether you had a legally protected privacy interest, whether your expectation of privacy was reasonable under the circumstances, and whether the intrusion was serious.
The location of the monitoring can affect that analysis. Monitoring an open work area can raise different concerns from monitoring a restroom, changing area, or another location where a person would normally expect greater privacy.
Notice can also matter. If you signed a policy stating that company computers, email, internet use, or specified workplace areas may be monitored, that notice can affect whether an expectation of privacy was reasonable. Notice does not erase every privacy right.
I had some issues with my employer. I called a couple of law firms. Some called back and some did not. When David Myers returned my call I found him to be down to earth and personable. He was cognitive about my issues and his knowledge of Labor Law was exemplary. My issues were addressed and handled to my satisfaction. I will recommend David Myers and his law group to anyone who asks. Thank you David.” - Ken Fretter The Meyers Law Group is definitely the lawyer’s you want. We got absolutely misguided by another attorney firm and Maria helped us out and got us taken care of. Maria will take the time to completely understand your case and her knowledge is well beyond the many firms we sat with.Do not! I repeat, Do not! Use another firm without talking to The Meyers Law Group first.Thank you Maria for getting us the results we were expecting." - Koa G. I have hired David Myers for 2 cases. The first was a wrongful termination based on my request for a reasonable accommodation under ADA law. The second case involved an employer who reneged on a written job offer/acceptance. In both cases, David was knowledgeable about the laws, presented the case well, and was supportive of me. We prevailed on both cases. I would recommend David without hesitation." - Anonymous
Can an Employer Record Audio at Work?
Audio recording can create separate legal issues from video monitoring.
California Penal Code section 632 generally prohibits intentionally recording or eavesdropping on a confidential communication without the consent of all parties. Whether a communication is confidential depends on the circumstances and whether the participants reasonably expect that the conversation will remain limited to the people involved.
A business call that begins with a clear recording notice can be different from a private conversation in a closed office when the participants reasonably expect that nobody else is listening or recording.
The same rule can affect employees. If you believe that a supervisor is retaliating, discriminating, or harassing you, secretly recording a meeting can create legal risk when the conversation is confidential.
Safer documentation can include emails, text messages, performance reviews, schedules, written policies, disciplinary notices, and a factual timeline, as long as you are legally entitled to keep those materials.
Surveillance evidence can support an employer’s explanation, but the same monitoring pattern can also support an employee’s privacy or retaliation claim. Context matters.
Choosing an Employment Law Attorney Recovering Damages in an Employment Law ClaimRelated Videos
Can Surveillance Be Used to Discipline or Fire an Employee?
Yes, in some circumstances. If surveillance was lawfully obtained and shows conduct that violates a legitimate workplace rule, an employer may be able to rely on that evidence when deciding whether to discipline or terminate an employee. Other laws, contracts, collective bargaining rights, and employer policies may also affect the decision.
Consider a warehouse employee in Rancho Cucamonga, California, who repeatedly ignores a documented safety rule in an area covered by disclosed security cameras. If the employer reviews the footage after a safety incident and applies the same rule consistently to comparable workers, the video may support discipline.
The analysis can change when monitoring is selective or begins after protected activity. Suppose you report unpaid wages, discrimination, unsafe practices, harassment, or another suspected legal violation. Soon afterward, a manager begins closely monitoring only you, documenting minor conduct that coworkers routinely engage in, and building a disciplinary record.
In that situation, the surveillance may become evidence about motive, timing, and unequal treatment. Relevant facts can include when the monitoring began, who knew about your complaint, whether comparable employees were monitored in the same way, and whether the employer changed its explanation for the discipline.
https://www.myerslawgroup.com/california-retaliation-lawyers/
Surveillance Cannot Be Used to Cover Retaliation
An employer cannot lawfully punish you because you engaged in activity protected by law. Protected activity can include certain complaints about discrimination or harassment, reports of unpaid wages, requests for protected leave or reasonable accommodation, reports of suspected legal violations, and participation in certain workplace investigations.
California Labor Code section 1102.5 protects qualifying whistleblower activity. The statute can protect an employee who reports information when the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of a state or federal statute, or a violation of or noncompliance with a local, state, or federal rule or regulation. It also prohibits retaliation for certain protected disclosures and refusals to participate in unlawful activity.
If monitoring changes after such a report, facts that may matter include:
- The date of your complaint or report
• Which managers knew about it
• When intensified monitoring began
• Whether coworkers were monitored in the same manner
• Whether discipline relied on rules that had previously gone unenforced
• Whether the employer changed its explanation for the decision
• Whether your performance history changed only after the protected activity
https://www.myerslawgroup.com/california-whistleblower-lawyers/
What About Personal Social Media and Personal Devices?
California Labor Code section 980 limits an employer’s ability to demand access to personal social media. In general, an employer cannot require or request that you disclose a username or password for personal social media, access personal social media in the employer’s presence, or reveal personal social media content.
The statute includes exceptions. An employer may request personal social media that it reasonably believes is relevant to an investigation of employee misconduct or a violation of law, as long as the material is used only for that investigation or a related proceeding. The statute also allows an employer to request credentials needed to access an employer-issued electronic device.
The distinction between personal and company-owned systems can matter. Employers generally have stronger arguments for monitoring company systems used for work than for reaching into private accounts or personal devices.
Public posts can still create workplace or litigation issues. Information that you make publicly available can be seen by supervisors, coworkers, investigators, or opposing parties.
How Does Remote Work Monitoring Affect Privacy?
Remote work has increased the use of digital monitoring tools. Employers may use software that records login times, active applications, screenshots, keyboard activity, website use, or other work-related data.
Monitoring a company laptop during scheduled work can present different privacy concerns from tracking a personal device or collecting unrelated personal information outside work hours. The broader the monitoring becomes, the more the facts surrounding notice, purpose, scope, and data collection can matter.
If you work remotely, review the employer’s written technology, device, remote-work, and monitoring policies. Keep copies of the policies and notices that apply to you if you are legally entitled to retain them.
Can California Privacy Law Apply to Employee Monitoring?
Yes, in some situations. The employment-related exemption under the California Consumer Privacy Act expired on December 31, 2022. As a result, employment-related personal information can fall within the CCPA when the employer is a business covered by that law.
Depending on the employer and the type of information involved, the CCPA can require notices about personal information practices and can provide rights concerning certain personal information, subject to statutory exceptions and limitations.
California privacy regulations effective January 1, 2026, can require risk assessments for certain processing that presents significant privacy risks, including some automated processing that infers or extrapolates an employee’s performance at work, behavior, location, or movements. Whether those rules apply depends on the business, the technology, and the way the information is processed.
Can Surveillance Evidence Be Challenged in a California Employment Case?
Sometimes. A video, screenshot, email log, location report, or productivity score does not automatically prove the employer’s version of events.
An employment attorney may examine:
- Whether the information was collected lawfully
• Whether the employer gave notice when notice was required or relevant
• Whether the evidence is complete
• Whether context is missing
• Whether the employer followed its own policies
• Whether comparable employees were treated differently
• Whether the monitoring started after protected activity
• Whether the employer preserved the full recording or data set
• Whether a screenshot, report, or video can be authenticated
• Whether an automated productivity measure actually reflects job performance
A single screenshot can omit what happened before or after it. A short video can leave out context. A productivity report can measure computer activity without measuring the quality or value of the work.
If surveillance is cited as the reason for your termination, review the firm’s wrongful termination information:
https://www.myerslawgroup.com/california-wrongful-termination-lawyers/
What Should You Do After Learning About Workplace Monitoring?
Start by preserving information lawfully. Keep copies of materials that you are entitled to possess, including relevant policies, monitoring notices, performance evaluations, disciplinary records, schedules, emails, and written complaints.
You can also create a factual timeline that records:
- When you first learned about the monitoring
• When the monitoring began or changed
• What complaints, reports, leave requests, or accommodation requests occurred beforehand
• Which managers knew about those events
• What discipline followed
• Whether coworkers engaged in similar conduct
• Whether the employer gave different explanations at different times
Do not delete data, access restricted systems, remove trade secrets, or take confidential company materials that you have no legal right to possess. Do not secretly record a confidential communication without understanding how California recording law applies to the situation.
If monitoring appears connected to a discrimination complaint, wage complaint, whistleblower report, protected leave request, accommodation request, or another protected act, preserve the chronology. Timing can become a key part of the legal analysis.
Speak With a California Employment Attorney
Workplace surveillance can support legitimate investigations and disciplinary decisions, but monitoring does not erase your privacy rights or permit unlawful retaliation, discrimination, or wrongful termination. The legal result depends on how the monitoring occurred, what information was collected, whether you had a reasonable expectation of privacy, and why the employer used the information.
The Myers Law Group represents employees in California employment disputes. The firm offers a free 30-minute consultation. You can contact the firm to discuss the facts of your situation.
https://www.myerslawgroup.com/contact/
Call or text: (888) 816-5204
tel:+18888165204
This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult an attorney about your specific situation.