Maine
Maine Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Maine's one-party consent rule, which flows from the definition of interception in 15 M.R.S.A. section 709(4) read with section 710, lets any employee who takes part in a workplace conversation record it without notifying coworkers or supervisors. Employers may adopt policies restricting recording as a condition of employment, and recording in private areas such as restrooms is prohibited.
Workplace recording in Maine is governed by the state's one-party consent wiretapping law, employment regulations, and common law privacy protections. Whether you are an employee documenting workplace issues or an employer implementing a monitoring program, understanding the legal boundaries is essential.
Employee Rights to Record in the Workplace
One-Party Consent Protection
Maine is a one-party consent state under 15 M.R.S.A. section 709(4) read with section 710. Employees can legally record conversations they participate in at work without informing other parties.

What employees can record:
- Conversations with supervisors about performance, discipline, or pay
- Meetings with HR representatives
- Discussions with coworkers about workplace conditions
- Phone calls with clients or vendors that the employee is part of
- Safety concerns or violations witnessed firsthand
- Verbal agreements about terms of employment
What employees cannot record:
- Private conversations between other people that the employee could not hear without a device, unless one of the participants gave prior permission
- Communications intercepted by placing hidden devices in private offices
Maine's definition of interception does not reach a conversation you can hear with normal, unaided hearing, and it protects only conversations spoken with a justified expectation that they would not be intercepted (15 M.R.S.A. section 709(4) and (5)).
Company Recording Policies
Many Maine employers have policies restricting or prohibiting recording in the workplace. These policies are enforceable as conditions of employment.
Important distinction:
- Violating a company recording policy is a disciplinary matter (warning, suspension, termination)
- It is not a criminal offense under Maine law, as long as the employee was a participant in the recorded conversation
NLRA Protection for Concerted Activity
The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) provides protection for employees who record workplace conditions as part of concerted activity. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) sets the standard that applies to Maine employers:
Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023): The NLRB held that employer work rules, including recording bans, are presumptively unlawful if they have a reasonable tendency to chill employees from exercising Section 7 rights, even if the rule was not adopted with unlawful intent. Under this standard, a blanket no-recording policy is presumptively unlawful unless the employer shows the rule advances a legitimate and substantial business interest that a more narrowly tailored rule could not serve.
NLRB GC 25-05 (Feb. 14, 2025): The Acting General Counsel rescinded a set of earlier General Counsel memos, including earlier guidance on employer electronic monitoring (GC 23-02). That changed enforcement guidance, not Board law. A General Counsel memo cannot overrule a Board decision.
Stericycle remains the Board's standard for judging workplace rules, including no-recording rules, though the current Board has signaled it may revisit it. In an October 2026 decision involving Tesla, the Board declined to apply Stericycle to an IT policy, and the General Counsel has asked the Board to overrule it.
Protected recording under Section 7 includes recording to document:
- Unsafe working conditions
- Unfair labor practices
- Wage and hour violations
- Union organizing activities
- Evidence of discriminatory treatment
A Maine employer whose no-recording policy would reasonably chill these activities faces presumptive invalidity under Stericycle. The employer must show the rule advances a legitimate and substantial business interest that a more narrowly tailored rule could not serve.
Employer Rights to Monitor the Workplace

Video Surveillance
Employers in Maine can install video surveillance cameras in the workplace for legitimate business purposes. Permitted locations include:
- Common work areas and production floors
- Entrances, exits, and hallways
- Parking lots and loading docks
- Cash registers and point-of-sale areas
- Warehouses and storage areas
Maine's violation-of-privacy crime, 17-A M.R.S. section 511, makes it a Class D crime to intentionally install or use a device for observing, photographing or recording in a "private place" without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there. The statute defines a private place as one where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from surveillance, including changing or dressing rooms, bathrooms and similar places. Prohibited or high-risk locations include:
- Employee restrooms
- Changing rooms and locker rooms
- Other places where employees may reasonably expect to be safe from surveillance
Private offices are not named in the statute; whether a camera there is lawful depends on the facts. Break rooms are shared spaces with a limited expectation of privacy, so they are generally not the kind of private place section 511 protects.
Audio Monitoring
Audio monitoring raises additional concerns under Maine's wiretapping statute. If an employer records conversations where no company representative is present, this could violate 15 M.R.S.A. section 710. To record audio legally:
- A company representative must be a party to the conversation, or
- All parties must be informed that audio recording is in effect
Electronic Communications Monitoring
Employers in Maine can monitor company-owned devices and networks, but under 26 M.R.S. section 620-A they must notify employees before starting any electronic monitoring, tell job applicants during the interview process, and give current employees written notice at least once a year. Violations carry a fine of $100 to $500 each. Monitoring can include:
- Emails sent through company email systems
- Internet usage on company networks
- Phone calls on company phones (with notice)
- Messages on company-provided devices
Employees generally have reduced privacy expectations when using employer-provided technology. The same law bars employers from using audiovisual monitoring in an employee's home, personal vehicle, or property unless the job requires it, and lets employees decline to install monitoring apps on their personal devices. It does not cover security or safety cameras, or GPS and safety devices on employer-owned vehicles.
Recording Workplace Harassment and Discrimination

Documenting Harassment
Employees who experience harassment in the workplace may use recordings as evidence. Under Maine's one-party consent law, an employee who is the target of harassment can record:
- Harassing comments made directly to them
- Discriminatory statements by supervisors or coworkers
- Verbal threats or intimidation
- Conversations where complaints are dismissed or minimized
Maine Human Rights Act
The Maine Human Rights Act prohibits workplace discrimination and harassment based on protected characteristics including race, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, and national origin. Recordings can support complaints filed with the Maine Human Rights Commission.
Whistleblower Protection
Maine's Whistleblower Protection Act, whose retaliation prohibition sits at 26 M.R.S.A. section 833, protects employees who, in good faith, report a suspected violation of law or a health or safety risk to their employer or a public body, take part in an investigation, or refuse an illegal directive. A recording can support such a report, but making the recording is not by itself protected activity.
Recording in Specific Workplace Settings

Healthcare Workplaces
Recording in healthcare settings involves additional considerations including patient privacy under HIPAA. Employees recording in medical facilities must be careful not to capture protected health information of patients they are not treating.
Government Workplaces
Anyone, including public employees, may record open public meetings of Maine government bodies under the Freedom of Access Act (1 M.R.S.A. section 404). The Act does not otherwise address recording in government offices. Areas of government workplaces that are open to the public carry reduced privacy expectations.
Remote Work
With remote work common in Maine, recording home-based work calls follows the same one-party consent rules. If you participate in a work call from home, you can record it under the one-party rule in 15 M.R.S.A. sections 709(4) and 710.
Recordings as Evidence in Employment Cases
Admissibility
Workplace recordings made under one-party consent are generally admissible in Maine courts and administrative proceedings. Authentication requires showing the recording is genuine, unaltered, and relevant.
Common Uses
Workplace recordings are used in:
- Wrongful termination cases
- Discrimination and harassment complaints
- Wage and hour disputes
- Workers' compensation claims
- Unemployment insurance appeals
- OSHA complaints
- NLRB proceedings
Administrative Proceedings
The Maine Human Rights Commission, Maine Department of Labor, and other administrative agencies accept properly obtained recordings as evidence in their proceedings.
Termination for Recording
At-Will Employment
Maine is an at-will employment state. Employers can generally terminate employees for any reason not prohibited by law, including violation of a company recording policy. However, termination for recording may be challenged if:
- The employee used the recording to report suspected illegal activity or a safety risk to the employer or a public body (whistleblower protection)
- The recording was part of protected concerted activity under the NLRA
- The termination was pretextual, with recording as a cover for discrimination
- The employer's policy was not consistently enforced
Wrongful Termination Claims
If terminated for recording, an employee may have claims for:
- Whistleblower retaliation under 26 M.R.S.A. section 833, if the firing was because of a good-faith report to the employer or a public body
- NLRA violation if the recording was concerted activity
- Discrimination if the recording documented protected-class harassment
Maine does not offer a separate common-law "public policy" wrongful-termination claim. In Bard v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 590 A.2d 152 (Me. 1991), Maine's highest court declined to recognize one and pointed to the Whistleblowers' Protection Act as the statutory remedy for retaliation over reports of illegal acts.
Practical Tips
For Employees
- Know your company's recording policy before recording
- Understand that recording is legally protected but may violate company policy
- Consider the risks and benefits before recording (potential termination vs. evidence preservation)
- Store recordings securely outside company devices
- Consult an employment attorney if you believe you need to record workplace violations
For Employers
- Develop a clear, written recording policy
- Communicate the policy to all employees
- Apply the policy consistently
- Understand that blanket recording bans may conflict with NLRA rights
- Consult legal counsel before terminating an employee for recording
More Maine Recording Topics
More Maine Recording Laws
More Maine Laws
- Maine AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Maine Dashcam Laws
- Maine Data Privacy Laws
- Maine Deepfake Laws
- Maine Employee Monitoring Laws
- Maine GPS Tracking Laws
- Maine Police Bodycam Laws
- Maine Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record my boss in Maine without telling them?
Yes. Maine's one-party consent rule (15 M.R.S.A. sections 709(4) and 710) allows you to record conversations you participate in without informing others. However, your employer may have a policy prohibiting recording, and violating it could result in disciplinary action or termination.
Can my employer record me at work in Maine?
Employers can use video cameras in common work areas for security purposes. Audio recording requires compliance with one-party consent. Cameras are prohibited in restrooms, changing areas, and other private spaces. Electronic monitoring of company devices and networks is generally permitted with notice.
Can I be fired for recording at work in Maine?
Maine is an at-will employment state, and employers can terminate for policy violations. However, if you used the recording to report suspected illegal activity or a safety risk to your employer or a public agency, Maine's whistleblower law may protect you, and NLRA protections may apply if the recording was part of concerted activity with coworkers. Consult an employment attorney before assuming termination is lawful.
Can I use a workplace recording as evidence in a Maine harassment complaint?
Yes. Recordings made legally under one-party consent are generally admissible in courts and administrative proceedings, including Maine Human Rights Commission complaints. The recording must be genuine, unaltered, and relevant to the claim.
Does my employer have to tell me about security cameras at work in Maine?
Not for ordinary security cameras. Maine's employer surveillance law (26 M.R.S. section 620-A) requires notice before electronic monitoring of employees and at least once a year, but it excludes cameras used for security or safety purposes. Best practice is still to inform employees about camera locations. A hidden camera in a private place, such as a bathroom or changing room, without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there is a Class D crime under 17-A M.R.S. section 511, and it could also support common-law privacy claims.
Updates
We restated the NLRB Stericycle test: a work rule with a reasonable tendency to chill Section 7 rights is presumptively unlawful unless the employer shows a legitimate and substantial business interest that a more narrowly tailored rule could not serve.
Added Maine's 2025 employer surveillance law (26 M.R.S. 620-A), which requires notice before electronic monitoring of employees and excludes security cameras, corrected the description of NLRB memo GC 25-05 and noted that the Board may revisit Stericycle, narrowed which conversations employees cannot record to match 15 M.R.S. 709, and clarified that Maine's whistleblower law protects reporting rather than recording. We removed a claim that Maine recognizes a public-policy wrongful-termination claim (its highest court declined to in Bard v. Bath Iron Works, 1991), corrected the description of the NLRB Stericycle rebuttal standard, and noted that a hidden camera in a private place is a crime under 17-A M.R.S. section 511.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the list of prohibited workplace camera locations: break rooms are generally not a protected private place, and added the governing statute, 17-A M.R.S. section 511.
Corrected the statutory basis of Maine's one-party consent rule (15 M.R.S.A. 709(4) with 710, not 712) and the Whistleblower Act pinpoint (26 M.R.S.A. 833).
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Added Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023): employer recording bans presumptively unlawful if they have a reasonable tendency to chill Section 7 rights, unless the employer shows a legitimate and substantial business interest that a more narrowly tailored rule could not serve. Added NLRB GC 25-05 (Feb. 14, 2025): the Acting General Counsel rescinded earlier enforcement memos; Stericycle remains the Board standard. Expanded NLRA Protection section to reflect current law.
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Maine Revised Statutes, Title 15: COURT PROCEDURE -- CRIMINAL, Part 2: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TRIAL, Chapter 102: INTERCEPTION OF WIRE AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
§ 710OffensesIn forcecited in 18 of our articles
1. Interception, oral communications prohibited. Any person, other than an employee of a communication common carrier, a law enforcement officer, an investigative officer, another employee of the Department of Corrections authorized to exercise law enforcement powers as described in Title 34‑A, section 3011 or a jail investigative officer or a jail employee acting at the direction of a jail investigative officer, carrying out practices otherwise permitted by this chapter, who intentionally or knowingly intercepts, attempts to intercept or procures any other person to intercept or attempt to intercept any wire or oral communication is guilty of a Class C crime. 2. Editing of tape recordings in judicial proceedings prohibited. Any person who knowingly or intentionally edits, alters or tampers with any tape, transcription or other sound recording, or knows of such editing, altering or tampering, and presents that recording in any judicial proceeding or proceeding under oath, without fully indicating the nature of the changes made and the original state of the recording, is guilty of a Class C crime. 3. Disclosure or use of wire or oral communications prohibited.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-23 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.maine.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Williams v. Poulos (1993) affirmed section 710(1) liability for intercepting employee calls and held section 710(3)(A) and (B) require only knowledge the information came through interception. Glenn A. Griffin v. Cristie J. Griffin (2014) allowed a parent's vicarious consent for a young child only on a good faith best-interest belief.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Glenn A. Griffin v. Cristie J. Griffin (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2014, 92 A.3d 1144)✓A father recorded his six-year-old daughter's nightly calls with her mother after overhearing abusive remarks; the court held a parent with a good faith, objectively reasonable best-interest belief may vicariously consent under section 709(4)(C), so section 710 was not violated.
- Archer v. Androscoggin County (Superior Court of Maine 2022)✓An attorney sought recordings of another inmate's jail calls under Maine's public records law; the court applied the wiretap chapter that makes interception a crime under section 710 and held a court-appointed defense lawyer is not within the section 712(4) disclosure exception.
- Williams v. Poulos (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 1993)✓Company owners secretly recorded employee phone calls using alligator clips wired to a VCR, and their lawyers then used the tapes; the First Circuit affirmed liability under section 710, holding subsection 3 requires only knowledge that the material came from an interception.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maine Smart Glasses Recording Laws: What You Need to Know, Maine Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent, § 710 and § 511, Maine Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026)
§ 709DefinitionsIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
The following words and phrases as used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates, shall have the following meanings. [PL 1973, c. 561 (NEW).] 1. Communication common carrier. "Communication common carrier" means any telephone or telegraph company. 1-A. Administration of criminal justice. 1-B. Administration of juvenile criminal justice. 1-C. Administration of juvenile justice. "Administration of juvenile justice" has the same meaning as in section 3003, subsection 1‑A. 2. Contents. "Contents," when used with respect to any wire or oral communication, means any information concerning the identity of the parties to such communication or the existence, contents, substance, purport or meaning of that communication. 3. Intercepting device. "Intercepting device" means any device or apparatus which can be used to intercept a wire or oral communication other than: A. Any telephone or telegraph instrument, equipment or facility or any component thereof being used by a communication common carrier in the ordinary course of its business or extension telephones used by a subscriber to telephone service; or [PL 1973, c. 561 (NEW).] B.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.maine.gov
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Glenn A. Griffin v. Cristie J. Griffin (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2014, 92 A.3d 1144)“…nterception of Wire and Oral Communications Act (the Act), 15 M.R.S. §§ 709-713 (2012),1 and (2) whether the court…”
- State v. Kehling (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 1991, 601 A.2d 620)“…e Maine’s Interception of Wire and Oral Communications Act, 15 M.R.S.A. §§ 709-713 (Supp.1991). As to the sentence, we…”
- State v. Cyran (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 1991, 586 A.2d 1238)“…versations. Nevertheless, both Maine’s wiretap regulations, 15 M.R.S.A. §§ 709-712, and the applicable federal provisi…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maine Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence (2026), Maine Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Cameras, Audio, and Privacy Rights (2026), Maine Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent (2026)
§ 712ExceptionsIn forcecited in 9 of our articles
1. Switchboard operators, communication common carrier agent. It is not a violation of this chapter for an operator of a switchboard or an officer, employee or agent of any communication common carrier, as defined in this chapter, to intercept, disclose or use that communication in the normal course of employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of service or to the protection of the rights or property of the carrier of the communication, provided that the communication common carriers shall not utilize service for observing or random monitoring, except for mechanical or service quality control checks, nor shall any such officer, employee or agent use or disclose to another the contents as defined in this chapter of the communication so intercepted. 2. Investigative officers.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.maine.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2014
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Desjardins (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 1979, 401 A.2d 165)“…nd under the circumstances was subject to the provisions of 15 M.R.S.A. § 712, which specifically proscribe the use o…”
- Glenn A. Griffin v. Cristie J. Griffin (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2014, 92 A.3d 1144)“…sent of either party to the call, and that no exception to 15 M.R.S. § 712 applied to allow Glenn to consent vica…”
- State v. Cyran (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 1991, 586 A.2d 1238)“…federal guidelines apply here, he specifically argues that 15 M.R.S.A. § 712 (Supp.1990) should be interpreted as pr…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maine Phone Call Recording Laws: Consent Rules for Cell, Landline, and VoIP (2026), Maine Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits (2026), Maine AI Meeting Recording Laws: One-Party Consent and Class C Penalties
Maine Revised Statutes, Title 26: LABOR AND INDUSTRY, Chapter 7: EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES
§ 831Short titleIn force
This subchapter may be cited as the "Whistleblowers' Protection Act." [PL 1983, c. 583, §15 (RAL).]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.maine.gov
Cited in 102 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Claire Trott v. H.D. Goodall Hospital (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2013, 66 A.3d 7)“…833(1)(C) of Maine’s Whistle-blowers’ Protection Act (WPA), 26 M.R.S. §§ 831-840 (2012), when it discharged her for…”
- Roland Pushard III v. Riverview Psychiatric Center (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2020, 224 A.3d 1239)“…lleging a violation of the Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, 26 M.R.S. §§ 831-840 (2018). Pushard argues that there…”
- Bernard Nadeau v. Twin Rivers Paper Company, LLC (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2021, 2021 ME 16)“…laim under the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act (WPA), 26 M.R.S. §§ 831-840 (2020). See M.R. Civ. P. 56(c). Na…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 833Discrimination against certain employees prohibitedIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
1. Discrimination prohibited. No employer may discharge, threaten or otherwise discriminate against an employee regarding the employee's compensation, terms, conditions, location or privileges of employment because: A. The employee, acting in good faith, or a person acting on behalf of the employee, reports orally or in writing to the employer or a public body what the employee has reasonable cause to believe is a violation of a law or rule adopted under the laws of this State, a political subdivision of this State or the United States; [PL 1987, c. 782, §4 (NEW).] B. The employee, acting in good faith, or a person acting on behalf of the employee, reports to the employer or a public body, orally or in writing, what the employee has reasonable cause to believe is a condition or practice that would put at risk the health or safety of that employee or any other individual. The protection from discrimination provided in this section specifically includes school personnel who report safety concerns to school officials with regard to a violent or disruptive student; [PL 1999, c. 351, §7 (AMD).] C.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-10 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislature.maine.gov
Cited in 124 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Stanley v. Hancock County Commissioners (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2004, 864 A.2d 169)“…1998 ME 227, ¶ 14 , 719 A.2d 509, 514 ; see also 26 M.R.S.A. § 833(1), (2) (1988 & Supp. 2004). [¶ 12] W…”
- Fuhrmann v. Staples the Office Superstore East, Inc. (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 2012, 58 A.3d 1083)“…ul employment discrimination. 5 M.R.S. § 4572(1)(A) (2011); 26 M.R.S. § 833(1)(A) (2011). An “employer” includes “a…”
- DiCentes v. Michaud (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine 1998, 719 A.2d 509)“…514 tions, location or privileges of employment.” 26 M.R.S.A. § 833(1) (1988) (emphasis added). The WPA def…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Maine At-Will Employment Laws: Exceptions and Your Rights, Maine Whistleblower Laws: Protections and How to Report, Wrongful Termination in Maine (2026): Laws, Deadlines, How to File
Sources and References
- 15 M.R.S.A. section 710 - Interception of Communications (Maine Legislature)(legislature.maine.gov).gov
- 15 M.R.S.A. section 709 - Definitions (One-Party Consent via Interception Definition)(legislature.maine.gov).gov
- Maine Human Rights Commission(maine.gov).gov
- 26 M.R.S.A. section 833 - Whistleblower Protection: Prohibited Retaliation(legislature.maine.gov).gov
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)(nlrb.gov).gov
- 17-A M.R.S. section 511, Violation of privacy(legislature.maine.gov).gov