Tennessee
Tennessee Employee Monitoring Laws: Workplace Surveillance and Social Media (2026)

Tennessee employers can generally monitor company email, phone lines, and computer systems under the federal wiretap law's business-use exception, since Tennessee has not enacted a Connecticut- or New York-style monitoring notice statute of its own. Where Tennessee law does draw a real line is personal social media: the Employee Online Privacy Act of 2014, Tenn. Code Ann. sections 50-1-1001 to -1004, bars employers from demanding an employee's or applicant's social media password.
This article provides general legal information about Tennessee employee monitoring law as of July 9, 2026. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Consult a Tennessee-licensed attorney about your specific situation.
Scope: This article covers Tennessee law on an employer's authority to monitor employees, access personal social media, and conduct workplace video, GPS, and biometric monitoring. It does not re-derive Tennessee's general recording-consent rules (see our Tennessee recording laws guide) or GPS law outside the employment context (see our Tennessee GPS tracking laws guide).
The Federal Baseline: the "Ordinary Course of Business" Exception
Tennessee's starting point for any workplace monitoring question is federal, not state, law. Title I of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act makes it unlawful to intentionally intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications without consent (, part of the Title I scheme at sections 2510-2523), but the business-extension exemption in (5)(a) excludes communications equipment used in the ordinary course of business, a category extended to employers who own the phone, email, and computer systems their staff use, from the Act's definition of a covered interception device, so employers are generally not liable for intercepting communications on that system in the ordinary course of business.
The leading case applying this exception is Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577 (11th Cir. 1983): once a monitored call is determined to be personal rather than business-related, the employer's ordinary-course exception generally ends. Tennessee has not enacted a state monitoring statute that narrows or expands this federal baseline; state law fills the gap only in the areas covered below.
Does Tennessee Require Notice Before Electronic Monitoring?
No. A small group of states, Connecticut, Delaware, New York, and (starting in 2026) Maine, require employers to give employees written or posted notice before monitoring phone, email, or internet use on the job. Tennessee has not enacted a comparable statute, so an employer can generally monitor company email, internet use, and phone lines on employer-owned systems relying on the federal ordinary-course exception, without a state-mandated notice or acknowledgment step.
It is worth clearing up a common point of confusion: some compliance guides describe Tennessee's Employee Online Privacy Act as if it were a general monitoring-notice law along the lines of New York's. It is not. The Act, discussed below, restricts an employer's access to an employee's personal online accounts; it does not require notice before an employer monitors its own devices or network. Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-1-1003(b) expressly preserves an employer's ability to monitor electronic communications devices it supplies or pays for and its own network.
Tennessee's Social Media Privacy Law for Employees
Tennessee's real state-specific employee monitoring statute is the Employee Online Privacy Act of 2014, enacted as Senate Bill 1808, effective January 1, 2015, and now codified at Tenn. Code Ann. sections 50-1-1001 to -1004. Section 50-1-1003(a) prohibits an employer from requiring or requesting that an employee or applicant disclose a personal online account password, log in in the employer's presence, or add the employer or a supervisor as a contact, and bars adverse action against someone who refuses.

The Act also spells out what an employer may still do. Under section 50-1-1003(b), an employer can require credentials for a device or account it supplies or pays for, discipline an employee for transferring proprietary or financial information to a personal account, investigate a personal account when it has specific information suggesting misconduct or a compliance problem, restrict website access on employer-owned devices, and comply with federal screening obligations. Section 50-1-1003(d) makes clear the Act creates no duty to monitor personal accounts and no liability for choosing not to.
One gap is worth flagging, because it differs from how Montana's and Utah's comparable laws work. Beyond the prohibitions in section 50-1-1003, the only other substantive section in Part 10 is section 50-1-1004, a severability clause. The Act does not itself set out a civil penalty, statutory damages figure, or express private right of action the way Montana's small-claims remedy or Utah's civil-action remedy do. An employee who believes an employer violated the password restriction generally needs another legal theory, such as a retaliation or wrongful-termination claim, rather than a stand-alone damages claim under Part 10 itself.
Video and Audio Surveillance in Tennessee Workplaces
Tennessee has no employment-specific video-surveillance statute, but general criminal law limits where a camera can point regardless of who installs it. Tenn. Code Ann. section 39-13-605 makes it an offense to knowingly photograph or record someone without consent when they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as while disrobing, and section 39-13-607 separately criminalizes secretly viewing or spying on someone under similar circumstances for sexual gratification. An employer that installs a camera in a restroom, locker room, or changing area, even for loss-prevention reasons, risks criminal exposure under both statutes and a civil invasion-of-privacy claim regardless of a posted monitoring policy.
Cameras in common work areas, sales floors, and entrances are generally permissible without a state-specific notice requirement. Audio recording is governed separately by Tennessee's one-party consent rule under Tenn. Code Ann. section 39-13-601: a person who is a party to a call, including the employer if it participates, may record it, but intercepting a conversation the employer is not part of is a Class D felony under section 39-13-602. Our Tennessee workplace recording guide covers that consent question, including an employee's own right to record at work, in depth.
GPS and Vehicle Tracking of Tennessee Employees
Tennessee has not enacted a dedicated employer vehicle-tracking notice statute comparable to New Jersey's N.J. Stat. section 34:6B-22. The relevant general-purpose law is Tenn. Code Ann. section 39-13-606, Electronic tracking of motor vehicles, which makes it an offense to knowingly install, conceal, or place a tracking device on a motor vehicle without the consent of all owners, for the purpose of monitoring an occupant. A separate clause reaches lessors: a person who leases a vehicle to someone else commits the same offense by installing a tracker without the lessee's consent. Violating either provision is a Class A misdemeanor, increased from a Class C misdemeanor by a 2016 amendment. The statute exempts law enforcement criminal investigations, tracking aimed at recovering stolen property, and manufacturer-installed tracking systems.
For an employer, the practical effect is straightforward in the most common fleet arrangement: a company that owns its vehicles outright satisfies the "consent of all owners" element on its own and can install GPS tracking without triggering the statute. The analysis shifts if the employer leases vehicles to employees or an employee drives a personally owned vehicle, since the owner whose consent matters may then be the employee rather than the company. For the general legal framework governing tracking devices in Tennessee, see our Tennessee GPS tracking laws guide.
Biometric Monitoring: Time Clocks and the Tennessee Information Protection Act
Employers increasingly use fingerprint or facial-recognition time clocks. Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14, is the strongest law of this kind nationally, requiring written consent and creating a private right of action with statutory damages; it does not apply outside Illinois, and Tennessee has no equivalent.

Tennessee does have the Tennessee Information Protection Act (TIPA), Tenn. Code Ann. section 47-18-3301 et seq., effective July 1, 2025, which classifies biometric data processed to uniquely identify a person as sensitive data requiring opt-in consent before a covered business processes it. But TIPA's definition of "consumer" expressly excludes a natural person acting in an employment context, so an employee's fingerprint or face scan collected for a workplace time clock generally falls outside TIPA's protections, which in any event are enforced exclusively by the Tennessee Attorney General with no private right of action. Tennessee employees relying on a biometric time clock are, practically speaking, protected mainly by their employer's own policies and by common-law privacy claims. See our Tennessee biometric privacy guide for how the consumer-facing rules work outside the employment context.
What Tennessee Employees Can Do About Monitoring Concerns
The right response depends on what happened. A camera in a restroom or locker room can support a law enforcement report under Tennessee's photographing or observation-without-consent statutes plus a civil claim. Intercepting a conversation without any participant's consent can draw prosecution under the wiretapping statute. Because the Employee Online Privacy Act sets out no damages remedy of its own, an employee facing retaliation for refusing a password request is better served documenting the adverse action and discussing a retaliation or wrongful-termination claim with an attorney than assuming Part 10 alone provides a payout.
Monitoring tied to a protected characteristic or a workers' compensation claim may fall under the Tennessee Human Rights Commission or the NLRB instead. Because Tennessee's rules are split across several sources, keep records and consult a Tennessee-licensed employment attorney. For the broader picture, see our Employee Monitoring Laws by State hub and our general US recording laws guide.
Disclaimer
This article provides general legal information about Tennessee employee monitoring law as of July 9, 2026, not a substitute for individualized legal advice. Employment monitoring disputes often involve overlapping statutes, employer policy, and federal law, and outcomes depend on specific facts. Readers should consult an attorney licensed in Tennessee about a particular situation.
Related articles
- Employee Monitoring Laws by State
- Tennessee Recording Laws
- Tennessee Workplace Recording Laws
- Tennessee GPS Tracking Laws
- Tennessee Biometric Privacy Laws
- US Recording Laws by State

Last updated: July 9, 2026. Statutes cited reflect their in-force version as of that date.
More Tennessee Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can my employer read my work email in Tennessee?
Generally yes, once the email is on an employer-owned system. Tennessee has no state notice statute, and Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-1-1003(b) preserves an employer's ability to monitor devices and networks it supplies.
Can my employer ask for my Instagram or Facebook password in Tennessee?
No, not for a personal account. The Employee Online Privacy Act of 2014, Tenn. Code Ann. sections 50-1-1001 to -1004, prohibits requiring or requesting a personal social media password, except in narrow misconduct-investigation or compliance circumstances.
Does Tennessee law require my employer to tell me I'm being monitored?
Not by a dedicated statute. Unlike Connecticut, Delaware, New York, and Maine, Tennessee has not enacted a general electronic-monitoring notice law, so no state-mandated written or posted notice is required before monitoring employer-owned systems.
Can my employer GPS track a company vehicle I drive in Tennessee?
Generally yes, if the company owns the vehicle outright. Tenn. Code Ann. section 39-13-606 requires the consent of all owners before installing a tracking device, and an employer that owns the vehicle satisfies that on its own; a leased vehicle requires the lessee's consent instead.
Can my employer put a camera in a Tennessee workplace restroom or locker room?
No. Tenn. Code Ann. sections 39-13-605 and 39-13-607 prohibit photographing, recording, or spying on someone without consent in a place with a reasonable expectation of privacy, including employer-installed cameras.
Can my Tennessee employer require a fingerprint scan for the time clock?
There is no Illinois-style biometric consent statute in Tennessee, and the state privacy law excludes employment-context data. Employees generally rely on employer policy and common-law privacy claims.
What can I do if my Tennessee employer violates the social media password law?
The Employee Online Privacy Act does not set out its own civil penalty or private right of action, unlike Montana's or Utah's comparable laws. An employee facing retaliation for refusing an unlawful request should document it and discuss a retaliation or wrongful-termination claim with an attorney.
Updates
Corrected two citation links: the 2016 GPS-tracking-penalty amendment now links to the actual enacting bill (HB 2095/SB 2608, 109th General Assembly) instead of an unrelated 2019 bill, and the wiretapping-statute citation now links to the actual text of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601 instead of an unrelated firefighter-recordings page.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the source of the employer 'ordinary course of business' monitoring doctrine from 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(a)(i) (a service-provider exception) to 18 U.S.C. 2510(5)(a) (the business-extension exemption courts actually apply to employer monitoring).
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on 5 statutory provisions held in our own legal record, each retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
United States Code Title 18
§ 2510DefinitionsIn forcecited in 120 of our articles
As used in this chapter— “wire communication” means any aural transfer made in whole or in part through the use of facilities for the transmission of communications by the aid of wire, cable, or other like connection between the point of origin and the point of reception (including the use of such connection in a switching station) furnished or operated by any person engaged in providing or operating such facilities for the transmission of interstate or foreign communications or communications affecting interstate or foreign commerce; “oral communication” means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation, but such term does not include any electronic communication; “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or possession of the United States; “intercept” means the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device.1 So in original. The period probably should be a semicolon.
Official text (excerpt) · as of 2026-07-28 · Read the full section at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,382 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2026
Leading cases: Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527) · Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (Supreme Court of the United States 1977, 433 U.S. 425) · Gannett Co. v. DePasquale (Supreme Court of the United States 1979, 443 U.S. 368)
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained, District of Columbia Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Kentucky Phone Call Recording Laws: What You Need to Know
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 397 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · as of 2026-08-12 · Read the full section at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2026
Leading cases: Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511) · United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297) · Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Audio Recording Laws: Consent Rules and Penalties, Alabama Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, Alabama Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and HIPAA Rules
Tennessee Code Annotated
§ 39-13-601Wiretapping and electronic surveillance — Prohibited acts — Exceptions.In forcecited in 18 of our articles
(a)(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in §§ 39-13-601 — [former] 39-13-603 [repealed] and title 40, chapter 6, part 3, a person commits an offense who: (A) Intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral
Official text (excerpt) · as of 2026-08-06 · Read the full section at publications.tnsosfiles.com
Cited in 25 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2026
Leading cases: Lawrence v. Lawrence (Court of Appeals of Tennessee 2010, 360 S.W.3d 416) · Harold Dean McDaniel v. Kimberly Ruth McDaniel (Court of Appeals of Tennessee 2010) · State of Tennessee v. Henry Floyd Sanders (Tennessee Supreme Court 2014, 452 S.W.3d 300)
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Tennessee Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties, Tennessee Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, Tennessee Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Rights and Restrictions
§ 39-13-606Electronic tracking of motor vehicles.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a)(1)(A) Except as provided in subsection (b), it is an offense for a person to knowingly install, conceal or otherwise place an electronic tracking device in or on a motor vehicle without the consent of all owners of the vehicle for the purpose of monitoring or following an occupant or occupants…
Official text (excerpt) · as of 2021-05-21 · Read the full section at archive.org
Cited in 2 court opinionsMost recently applied by a court: 2022
Leading cases: Aegis Investigative Group v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville & Davidson County (Court of Appeals of Tennessee 2002, 98 S.W.3d 159) · Ashley Shearin Meade v. Paducah Nissan, LLC (Court of Appeals of Tennessee 2022)
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 50-1-1001Short title.In force
This part shall be known and may be cited as the “Employee Online Privacy Act of 2014.”
Official text (excerpt) · as of 2021-05-21 · Read the full section at archive.org
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 50-1-1001 to -1004, Employee Online Privacy Act of 2014 (SB 1808)(capitol.tn.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. § 2510(5)(a), business-extension exemption excluding employer-provided communications equipment used in the ordinary course of business from the Wiretap Act's device definition(law.cornell.edu).gov
- Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577 (11th Cir. 1983)(law.resource.org)
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601, Wiretapping and electronic surveillance, prohibited acts, exceptions (Justia)(law.justia.com)
- Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-605, 39-13-607, Unlawful photographing in violation of privacy; observation without consent(capitol.tn.gov).gov
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-606, Electronic tracking of motor vehicles (as amended by 2016 Tenn. Pub. Ch. 860, HB 2095/SB 2608)(wapp.capitol.tn.gov).gov
- Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-18-3301 et seq., Tennessee Information Protection Act (TIPA)(tn.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. § 2511 – Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited(uscode.house.gov).gov