North Dakota
North Dakota Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

North Dakota is a one-party consent state under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-15-02, so an employee may record any workplace conversation they participate in without notifying coworkers or managers. Employers may still enforce no-recording policies, and violating one can result in termination even though the recording itself is not a criminal offense.
North Dakota's one-party consent law under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-15-02 gives employees broad rights to record workplace conversations. You can record in-person meetings and phone calls you participate in without informing other parties, as long as the recording is not made for criminal or unlawful purposes. Employers also have rights to conduct surveillance in appropriate areas.
This guide covers employee recording rights, employer surveillance rules, how company policies interact with state law, federal labor protections, and how workplace recordings are used in legal proceedings.
Employee Recording Rights
Recording In-Person Workplace Conversations
Under one-party consent, North Dakota employees can record face-to-face workplace interactions including:
- Meetings with supervisors and managers
- Performance reviews and disciplinary meetings
- Conversations with HR representatives
- Discussions with coworkers
- Safety briefings and verbal instructions
- Union meetings and organizing discussions
The recording must not be for criminal or unlawful purposes. Documenting harassment, preserving verbal agreements, and recording for potential litigation are all lawful purposes.
Recording Work Phone Calls
One-party consent applies to work phone calls. You can record calls with clients, conference calls, virtual meetings on Zoom or Teams, and calls with vendors without informing other participants.
The Unlawful Purpose Limitation
Even with one-party consent, recording at work becomes illegal if done for:
- Blackmail or extortion of a coworker or employer
- Facilitating fraud or theft
- Stalking or intimidating coworkers
- Any other criminal or unlawful purpose
Employer Surveillance Rights
Video Surveillance
North Dakota employers can install cameras in common work areas where employees have no reasonable privacy expectation: lobbies, sales floors, warehouses, parking lots, hallways, and cash register areas.
Prohibited Areas
Employers cannot place cameras in bathrooms, locker rooms, changing areas, nursing rooms, or medical examination areas. Cameras in these locations can result in criminal charges and civil liability.
Audio Surveillance
Employer audio surveillance follows one-party consent rules. An employee on the recorded call satisfies the consent requirement. However, the NLRB has found that pervasive audio surveillance can interfere with employees' Section 7 rights.
Company Recording Policies

Can Employers Ban Recording?
Many employers maintain no-recording policies. These policies are enforceable as employment conditions. Key points:
- A company policy cannot make recording a crime
- Violating the policy can result in termination (North Dakota is at-will)
- The recording itself remains legally valid
- Recordings made in violation of policy can still be used as evidence
When NLRA Protections Apply
The National Labor Relations Act protects recording as concerted activity when employees record to document unsafe conditions, wage theft, or unfair labor practices. Under Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023), the NLRB evaluates no-recording policies under a new employee-protective standard: a rule is presumptively unlawful if it could reasonably be read to interfere with Section 7 rights, unless the employer demonstrates a legitimate business justification. Overly broad policies that ban recording in all circumstances, with no safety-related carve-out, are particularly vulnerable under this standard.
Federal Protections
OSHA Whistleblower Protections
OSHA protects employees who report unsafe conditions. Recordings of safety violations support whistleblower claims under 29 U.S.C. § 660(c).
EEOC and Discrimination Documentation
Employees can use recordings to support discrimination and harassment claims filed with the EEOC. Courts evaluate these recordings on a case-by-case basis.
Using Workplace Recordings in Legal Proceedings
Workplace recordings are admissible in North Dakota courts for employment lawsuits, workers' compensation claims, and administrative proceedings before the North Dakota Department of Labor. They can support claims of wrongful termination, harassment, discrimination, wage theft, and retaliation.
Remote Work Monitoring
North Dakota does not have specific remote work monitoring legislation. Employers should disclose monitoring practices in writing and limit monitoring to work activities on company devices.
More North Dakota Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
Back to North Dakota Recording Laws
More North Dakota Recording Topics
More North Dakota Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record my boss in North Dakota without telling them?
Yes. Under one-party consent, you can record workplace conversations you participate in without informing your boss. The recording must not be for criminal or unlawful purposes. Be aware your employer may have a no-recording policy that could lead to termination.
Can my employer put cameras in the workplace in North Dakota?
Yes, in common areas like lobbies, sales floors, and parking lots. Cameras cannot be placed in bathrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas. North Dakota does not require employers to notify employees about workplace cameras.
Can I be fired for recording at work in North Dakota?
Yes. While the recording is legal under state law, violating a company no-recording policy can result in termination because North Dakota is an at-will employment state. The NLRA may protect recording done as concerted activity.
Can workplace recordings be used as evidence in North Dakota?
Yes. Lawfully made workplace recordings are generally admissible in employment lawsuits, workers' compensation claims, and administrative proceedings. The recording must be authenticated and relevant.
Does the NLRA protect workplace recording in North Dakota?
The NLRA protects employees who record as part of concerted activity, such as documenting unsafe conditions or labor violations. Overly broad employer no-recording policies that chill protected activity may violate Section 7 of the NLRA.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
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.
North Dakota Century Code
§ 12.1-15-02Interception of wire or oral communications - EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 17 of our articles
A person is guilty of a class C felony if he: Intentionally intercepts any wire or oral communication by use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device; or Intentionally discloses to any other person or intentionally uses the contents of any wire or oral communication, knowing that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire or oral communication. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if he secretly loiters about any building with intent to overhear discourse or conversation therein and to repeat or publish the same with intent to vex, annoy, or injure others. It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection 1 that: The actor was authorized by law to intercept, disclose, or use, as the case may be, the wire or oral communication. The actor was: A person acting under color of law to intercept a wire or oral communication, and He was a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication had given prior consent to such interception.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ndlegis.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Fargo Women's Health Organization, Inc. v. Larson (1986) applied the subsection 3(c) defense to this section and held that recordings of calls were properly admitted because the callers knew of and consented to the recording of their own conversations.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Fargo Women's Health Organization, Inc. v. Larson (North Dakota Supreme Court 1986, 391 N.W.2d 627)✓A private investigator hired by an abortion clinic recruited callers to phone a rival anti-abortion clinic and recorded the calls with the callers' consent; the court held that consent triggered the defense in section 12.1-15-02(3)(c), so the tapes were admitted.
- Bartnicki v. Vopper (Supreme Court of the United States 2001, 532 U.S. 514)“…Ann. § 30-12-1 (1994); N. C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-287 (1999); N. D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02 (1997); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.52…”
- American Civil Liberties Union of Ill. v. Alvarez (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2012, 679 F.3d 583)“…55 § 750.539c; N.D. Cent. Code. Ann. § 12.1-15-02. The Cali- fornia statute is illustrat…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: North Dakota Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, North Dakota Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026), North Dakota AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
United States Code Title 29
§ 660Judicial reviewIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by an order of the Commission issued under subsection (c) of section 659 of this title may obtain a review of such order in any United States court of appeals for the circuit in which the violation is alleged to have occurred or where the employer has its principal office, or in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, by filing in such court within sixty days following the issuance of such order a written petition praying that the order be modified or set aside. A copy of such petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Commission and to the other parties, and thereupon the Commission shall file in the court the record in the proceeding as provided in section 2112 of title 28.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1,040 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- National Realty and Construction Company, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, Secretary of Labor, Party (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1973, 489 F.2d 1257)“…85, Sept. 6, 1972. Review by this court is available under 29 U. S.C. § 660(a) (1970). 2 . Occ…”
- Michael P. Gaffney, Thomas Bell, Edward Anderson v. Riverboat Services of Indiana, Incorporated, Riverboat Services, Incorporated, Robert Heitmeier v. Showboat Marina Casino Partnership, Showboat, Incorporated, Showboat Indiana, Incorporated (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2006, 451 F.3d 424)“…was modeled after OSHA's retaliatory discharge provision, 29 U.S.C. § 660 (c). See S.Rep.No. 98-454, at 12 (198…”
- Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1995, 514 U.S. 122)“…402 (b)(6); Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U. S. C. § 660 (a); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Mexico Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights (2026), Wisconsin Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights (2026), Florida Whistleblower Laws: Protections and How to Report
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- N.D.C.C. § 12.1-15-02(ndlegis.gov).gov
- NLRA(nlrb.gov).gov
- OSHA(whistleblowers.gov).gov
- EEOC(eeoc.gov).gov
- North Dakota Department of Labor(nd.gov).gov