Watching the Watchers: The Expanding Role of Workplace Surveillance

| July 29, 2026

Workplace surveillance now extends well beyond visible CCTV cameras.

Employers may monitor computer activity, emails, telephone calls, vehicle movements, building access, location data, biometrics and productivity through automated systems.

While these technologies are undoubtedly useful, they also create significant legal and employee relations risks if they are poorly designed, inadequately disclosed or used for purposes beyond those originally contemplated. 

The Fair Work Commission’s decision in Lawrence v United Workers’ Union [2024] FWC 2040 illustrates those risks. 

Background 

Matthew Lawrence’s employment with the United Workers’ Union was terminated in May 2024 partly because of alleged drug use at the Union’s Brisbane office in October 2023. The conduct had been captured by CCTV which recorded both video and audio. 

The Union said it had not realised the system was recording sound and that the audio function had been activated following an upgrade. However, the recordings had been viewed and considered during the disciplinary process and played to Lawrence. 

In the subsequent unfair dismissal proceedings, Lawrence sought production of the video and the audio. The Union was prepared to produce the video without sound, but objected to producing the audio, including because of potential issues under Queensland’s Invasion of Privacy Act 1971. 

Despite the Union’s position, the Commission exercised it discretion in line with the Fair Work Act 2009 to grants Mr Lawrence’s production requests, which included the audio. 

Interestingly, the positions held by the parties were (in summary): 

1. the audio was relevant to Mr Lawrence’s unfair dismissal claim as it would show that Mr Lawrence was unwell, and the termination was harsh as a result; 

2. in addition to concerns the release of the recording with audio would contravene the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld), the audio was not relevant in the Union’s view because the conduct was admitted to and was not in dispute, and on this basis, was not material to the matter before the Commission. 

The Commission’s Decision

As mentioned, the Commission ordered production of both the video and audio.  

Vice President Gibian found that the recordings could be relevant not only to whether there was a valid reason for dismissal, but also to the seriousness of the conduct, surrounding circumstances, mitigation and whether the dismissal was harsh. 

Importantly, the Decision did not determine whether the audio had been recorded unlawfully or whether it would ultimately be admitted into evidence. The Decision concerned production only.

Key Lessons for HR and IR Practitioners

1. Understand What Your Surveillance Systems Collect

The first lesson is that employers must understand what their surveillance systems actually collect. A policy referring to CCTV images is inadequate if the equipment also records sound, location data or other information. Responsibility cannot simply be delegated to IT providers or security contractors. 

Employers should confirm: 

• what functions are enabled; 
• where information is stored; 
• who may access it; 
• how long it is retained; and 
• whether third-party providers can use or disclose it. 

2. Understand the Legal Framework

The second lesson is that Australia’s workplace surveillance framework is fragmented. New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory have specific workplace surveillance legislation, including notice and, in some circumstances, consultation requirements. Other jurisdictions regulate surveillance through a combination of listening-device, privacy, employment and criminal laws. 

Video, audio, tracking and data surveillance may each attract different rules. An employer should not assume that because a camera is lawfully installed, every form of information captured by that device can be lawfully collected or used. 

3. Use Surveillance Evidence Carefully

The third lesson is that surveillance evidence must be handled carefully during disciplinary processes. Before relying on it, employers should consider: 

• whether the surveillance was lawful; 
• whether employees were properly notified; 
• whether the information is being used for its original purpose; 
• whether the recording is complete and reliable; 
• what context may be missing; 
• whether the employee has had a genuine opportunity to respond; and 
• whether the proposed disciplinary outcome is proportionate. 

A recording may establish that conduct occurred, but it will not necessarily establish that dismissal is fair. Length of service, prior record, health, consistency of treatment and other mitigating factors remain relevant. 

Lawrence also demonstrates that an employer may not be able to avoid production of surveillance material simply by deciding not to rely on it. If the material informed the investigation or disciplinary decision, it may still be relevant to the employee’s case.

Practical Steps for Employers

Before introducing or changing surveillance, organisations should: 

• undertake a jurisdiction-specific legal review; 
• document the purpose of the surveillance; 
• assess whether it is necessary and proportionate; 
• consult employees where required; 
• provide clear written notice; 
• verify the system’s actual configuration; 
• impose access, retention and deletion controls; and 
• train managers on when surveillance material may be used. 

Key Takeaway

The central lesson from this Decision is that workplace surveillance must be deliberately designed, accurately disclosed and carefully governed. The key question is not merely whether technology can monitor employees, but whether the organisation can justify what it collects and every use subsequently made of that information.

Supporting Compliant Workplace Surveillance

Workplace surveillance can be a valuable management tool, but only if it is implemented and used lawfully.

IRiQ Law can assist employers with workplace surveillance policies, privacy and surveillance compliance, disciplinary processes, workplace investigations, and reviewing surveillance practices to ensure they align with legal obligations across Australian jurisdictions.

If your organisation is introducing, reviewing or relying on workplace surveillance, contact our team for practical advice and support.