What repercussions could I face for secretly recording discriminatory and harassing behavior from leaders?

[GoldenRiverRose]

For over 4 months now I have been dealing with discriminatory and harassing behavior from the leaders at my workcenter. I've reported these behaviors to multiple leaders with no change. I've contacted the Ethics Hotline and been told the situation had been "handled", even though the behavior has continued.

I have been recording these inappropriate interactions since September, and have filed an official complaint with the EEOC. I meet with the EEOC in March to look at upping the complaint to a charge. I live in a single-party consent state.

I've been trying to find another job, but the harassment and complete disregard by leaders is starting to drive me to a dark place. I'm looking at applying for unemployment under "constructive discharge" (where you were forced to quit an unsafe job).

For both the EEOC complaint and the unemployment application, I am planning on using the recordings as proof of the inappropriate conduct. My question is: if/when the existence of these recordings gets back to Target, what kinds of repercussions can I expect to face? Can they do anything if I no longer work for Target?

Thanks.

 

[Fluttervale]

But where's the corroborating evidence when the writer says ear sex and Johnny says Hello Kitty? Where is the proof that will show for certain what was said in the back room?

Usually in those cases, the writer says “ear sex down aisle three” and Johnny says “nope I’ve never been in aisle 3.” The camera proves Johnny wrong and Johnny is now painted a liar. Or writer plus three other people complain about Johnny and eat sex.

 

[Frontlanegirl]

Consult a lawyer

 

[Tessa120]

Usually in those cases, the writer says “ear sex down aisle three” and Johnny says “nope I’ve never been in aisle 3.” The camera proves Johnny wrong and Johnny is now painted a liar. Or writer plus three other people complain about Johnny and eat sex.

And when Lying Lisa is smart enough to "document comments" of encounters that match video but are lying about the verbal exchange? He said, she said.

If a one party state then audio provides the proof that documenting won't.

 

[Fluttervale]

And when Lying Lisa is smart enough to "document comments" of encounters that match video but are lying about the verbal exchange? He said, she said.

If a one party state then audio provides the proof that documenting won't.

As long as Johnny doesn’t deny that they talked, it remains he said she said. It’s when a TM lies about a situation and can be proved to have lied.
I had a situation with a TM at a previous job that was witnessed by several other TMs, but what really nailed the TM was that she claimed the interaction never happened, and if it did she didn’t do a specific thing. But it was all on silent video, including the specific thing that she claimed she would never do. No one cared about the witness testimony until she lied about things that were on the video. Once it was established that she was a liar, the witness testimony only established what level of punishment could apply.

She probably would have won if she had admitted the whole thing. I’ve seen the same play out in many other firings.

 

[Angular Momentum]

But where's the corroborating evidence when the writer says ear sex and Johnny says Hello Kitty? Where is the proof that will show for certain what was said in the back room?

Consistent documentation of interactions with dates and times and detailed accounts of what happened are pretty good evidence.

The other party won't have that. Spot does have cameras and they have pdds and push clocks. But if the OP is documenting interactions that evidence can actually make the case stronger against spot.

If recordings are allowed in court then all the better but written accounts work just as well and in tandem with anything else.

 

[dannyy315]

Yes I did. My state does not allowed recording without consent of both parties. Spot is checking on your claim . Did you talk to your SD ?

I'm sure there's exceptions for crimes and felonies. Police aren't going to say "how dare you record that person robbing a bank without their consent!"

 

[Tessa120]

I'm sure there's exceptions for crimes and felonies. Police aren't going to say "how dare you record that person robbing a bank without their consent!"

My state, there are exceptions when in public where there is no expectation of privacy. So yeah, you can record the bank robber in action since it's in public. However if the bank robber is your friend, calls you to tell you, recording the call is a felony even though you are trying to help catch a bank robber. If the robber is your neighbor and is counting the cash inside his home and dusting off the note for the next robbery, recording the evidence on video is a misdemeanor.

There is no exception for helping to stop a crime. There are exceptions for surveillance cameras installed by you/your representative in your own home and your property without intent to secretly video record someone in a private residence (meaning don't aim a camera directly at a neighbor's window). There is an exception for being in public with no expectation of privacy. There's a reverse exception where informing someone they are being recorded when you are committing a crime or "torturous intentions" against them means they are legally unable to give consent.

 

[60SecondsRemaining]

First let me say that it's not ok that this happens, and I'm sorry that this happened, and that places like Target (and the rest of corporate America) are morally corrupt shitbags who have no concerns for their employees.

Everyone is giving you good advice but what's missing here is context.

You were harassed and discriminated against, but we don't understand the level or the how interaction there.

What is your end goal? To inflict some measure of legal punishment on them? It's never going to happen. Target has unlimited funds and legal resources, they will destroy you financially before they let you get the win here. Recordings or not.

In my mind your best option is to engage a lawyer, put your cards on the table, recordings and all, and see what they think your avenues are. If the recordings coupled with the lack of action are damning enough then Target would likely offer some sort of settlement to end the matter quickly. Fighting corporate America anywhere other than in the court of public opinion is just going to end with you exhausted and broke.

It sucks, and it's unfair, but unless you're some sort of secret millionaire that's just just reality of it. And please do not take this as me being insensitive to your situation, I saw shit like this a lot during my retail tenure and like I said before it's definitely not ok.