• Home
  • Articles
    • Front Page
    • General Interest
    • Special Interests
    • Snippets
    • Mayoral Notes
    • Letters to the Editor
  • Our Community
    • Our People
    • Question of the Week
    • Jobs in the Central West
    • Be Seen
    • What’s On
  • Special Interests
    • Women In Business
    • Rural Round Up
    • My Place
    • Health & Wellbeing
    • Loving Local Living
    • Just a Short Drive
    • Real Estate
  • Sports
    • Bowls
    • Cricket
    • Equestrian
    • Footy Tips
    • Golf
    • Netball
    • Rugby League
    • Rugby Union
    • Soccer
    • Touch Football
  • Classifieds
  • Competitions
  • Contact Us
    • Contact Page
    • Advertise with us
    • Testimonials
    • Submit an Article
    • Subscribe to the Parkes Phoenix

Parkes Phoenix

Legal Eagle

November 15, 2018 By Maggi Barnard

Is Workplace Surveillance Lawful?
The Workplace Surveillance Act 2005 (NSW) provides for dedicated workplace surveillance legislation in NSW.
Generally, an employee must consent, either expressly or impliedly, to the surveillance of private activities or private conversations.

The Telecommunications (Interceptions and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) also places limitations on the recording of telephone conversations. The legislation relating to surveillance devices specifies what constitutes a “private
activity” or “private conversation”. Private activities or conversations may occur in any workplace, whether a corporate office or a public space, such as a retail store.

Use of surveillance as evidence can ensure employees are not engaging in misconduct, however surveillance must be properly obtained by an employer to enable it to rely on the surveillance in disciplinary action or court proceedings. The recent Federal Court decision of Chappell vs Griffin Coal Mining Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1248 is a sound reminder of this.

In the case of Chapell vs Griffin Coal Mining Pty Ltd, an employee was caught making adverse comments about the employer to an external person on a video surveillance device worn by a security guard hired by the employer. When the employer sought to rely on the surveillance as evidence of misconduct, the employee argued that the evidence was improperly obtained – it was a private conversation that he did not consent to being recorded. The court agreed
and the surveillance could not be used as evidence.

Where employers intend to undertake surveillance in the workplace, they should inform employees in writing and how the surveillance will be undertaken. Best practice is draw up a workplace surveillance policy that is easily accessible by employees, and provided to all new employees.

Filed Under: Articles, General Interest

Click here to download the recent issue (203) of The Forbes & Parkes Phoenix (2MB PDF) – 21st August 2026

SEARCH THE PHOENIX

STAY CONNECTED

The Parkes Phoenix would like to thank you, our Facebook friends, for your continued support and readership!

Phoenix Office
7/113-127 Rankin Street, Forbes NSW 2871

Editor
0432 337 278
editor@parkesphoenix.com.au

Sales
0432 337 278
sales@parkesphoenix.com.au

View our Privacy Policy.
View our Conflict Resolution Process.
View our Ethics and Complaints Policy.
Want to advertise with us?
Information on our Community Promotions.

We are always looking for new articles of interest to the local community.

Please feel free to submit an article for possible inclusion in a future issue.

To submit an article, click here to use our online article submission form.

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2026 · Magazine Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

nsw government logo

The Parkes Phoenix's Digital Diversification of Free Regional Media project is proudly funded by the NSW Government Regional Media Fund

Go to mobile version