Can Your Employer Bar You From Recording Conversations at Work

My question involves labor and employment law for the state of: Hawaii

Federal/state law allows recording conversations as long as at least one party consents. However. company policy states that:

"Taping communications of, or conversations with, other employees or
management without proper authorization from a Senior Vice President or the
Communications department, and permission from the individual involved"

Lets say that i'm recording conversations for evidence in an investigation within the company, and HR finds out that I have been recording without 'proper permission' and terminates me. I did not violate state/federal law, but from the companies perspective it was not a 'wrongful' termination.

How would this hold up in court? Can companies just make any policy that contradicts state AND federal law and get away with it? Where is the line drawn?

They can absolutely make their own rules to a huge extent.

Tape without consent, and you can legally be fired.

Let's use another example. You and your friend have been accused of stealing in the workplace. There's no proof, really, and obviously neither of you are convicted.

Can the company fire you anyway? Can they legally tell prospective employees that you were fired for suspicion of theft? Yes, and yes.

Right, but why is a policy against taping that violates state and federal law acceptable? Firing someone for the suspicion of theft doesn't violate state and federal law, does it?

Let me put it another way? The law to which you're referring ALLOWS something. It does not disallow something.

There is no law against you eating Twinkies every day for lunch.

However, it would NOT be against the law for your company to fire you for such behavior (maybe they want to save the Twinkie, I don't know).

If a company allows something that the law specifically prohibits, THAT would be a problem.

But a for a private employer, they can absolutely disallow certain legal behaviors (public policy and other exceptions notwithstanding).

I'm not sure how much simpler I can put it :)

Even if the purpose of the recording was because the employee had reasonably believed there was a violation of employee rights i.e. discrimination and/or retaliation from bringing up a previous issue and wanted to protect themselves by having concrete evidence of it? how would that hold up in court?

Now you're talking about two different things.

I suggest you retain an attorney.

Well what if said employee had evidence via audio recording that shows HR contradicting company policy and displaying favoritism towards management and not adhering to company policy towards every employee, managers included. The employee also had other contradictions with HR towards company policy, and also signs that the employee was being retaliated against, but retaliation doesn't seem to be defined well in the policy handbook, and seems to be more of an opinion whether something constitutes as retaliation or not.

employee doesn't know what to do- to show HR that he has proof of these claims, or just get screwed as the employee is being trivialized and may potentially get fired because of HR taking the manager's side.

The evidence may or may not be admissible in civil or criminal court, but that still doesn't solve the immediate problem you have.

if you hand to speculate, off hand, could you give an example where it may not be admissible as evidence?

Because the recording WOULD be legally obtained, it should generally be admissible. But you should also expect the opposing side's attorneys - and they will be present, and aggressive - to try and have it tossed.

Do you have an attorney? I've read your other thread and to be honest, you're going to need one if you decide to proceed with this.

(I'm not entirely sure you SHOULD proceed, but that's just my opinion. At least get an initial consultation with an attorney)