recording meetings

[newtimes]

Sorry I can not answer your question but "Digital pens" are becoming acceptable means of recording information. http://www.bristol.ac.uk/esu/e-learning ... gitalpens/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A senior college lecturer used one in Scotland when having a meeting with the Scottish education minister, he was accused of using a spy device. I would of called it a truth device.

[UnhappyGremlin]

It is dodgy legal ground to record without their knowledge.
Though secret recordings have been allowed in ET's in the past.

Personally, I'd put the device in full view, ask their permission (preferably on tape).
If they say no, ask why. When they've finished, say objection noted. But that you are still recording the meeting, as you prefer it to making notes. Offer them a copy.

They basically don't want you to be able to prove anything they may say.
If they insist there is an agreement not to record, ask for it again, on tape, mentioning your previous request being ignored/not fulfilled.
Until you see it, you see no reason to comply. After all, if they are right and these recordings can't be used, what difference does it make if they are made or not?

[5plusbonusball]

Best thing is to take a witness or cwu rep in with you then when you get home , write it up and file it.

[gluteus maximus]

Take my advice and never record a meeting. You will have the minutes of that meeting if a point of conflict is identified.

If you get found out recording a meeting without prior consent, any level of trust will evaporate and managers will refuse to negotiate with you in the future

I just cannot believe trade union reps are even asking this question

[Mezza]

At a recent level 2 Grievance interview we asked if we could record the interview as the person conducting the interview had a colleague with her to take notes.

We were told that it wasn't in line with procedure and that we weren't allowed to record it. Besides the minutes would be sent to us for approval and if necessary amendment.

The notes of the meeting bared no resemblence to half of what was said and we mad the amendments and sent them back.

We got a reply saying that as the notes had been so heavily amended we must have been recording the interview despite being asked not to and that advice on the matter had been sought from the head of ER. Who said they would not take any further action at this time, but it was noted.

Will be interesting to see if any more is mentioned when we have our Level 3 interview.

So it's not allowed = apparently and if you do as told and don't record it, they will assume you have anyway !

[dvbuk55]

If there is a new understanding and trust between workers and management surely you wouldn't need to record anything because everything would be above board and a manager wouldn't tell a lie or twist the truth to suit his own purpose:cuppa

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 15&t=52272" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[UnhappyGremlin]

If the notes were complete and unedited (instead of being edited with a view to 'proving' an employees 'guilt'), then employees wouldn't have the need or desire to want to record a meeting.
I know of someone who had a meeting and recorded it, and it lasted about three quarters of an hour. The notes provided by the company were two pages long. A MASSIVE discrepancy.

Whether a meeting is recorded or not, whether they give permission or not, or whether they know or not, is kind of irrelevant.
If the company wants to accuse you of recording it, with ZERO evidence, they will should they be so inclined.
But, if you're accompanied by a colleague, and you're both taking notes, you will have detailed and extensive notes, and therefore there will be little difference between to two approaches.

Companies basically fear recorded meetings coming back to haunt them in ET's. But, if they conduct disciplinary procedures/meetings etc. correctly, fairly, openly etc., then they have nothing to fear, as there would never be any possibility of a secretly made recording ever causing them an issue, because they'd have followed policies and procedures, and the case would be water tight.