Jackson Township, New Jersey — Amanda Glenn, a former program manager with the New Jersey Board of Tree Experts, has filed legal action against her former employer, citing severe privacy violations stemming from unauthorized surveillance. The lawsuit unfolded after Glenn discovered a concealed camera aimed specifically at her workstation, an action she claims was both unconsented and illegal under state law.
The incident reportedly began in October 2023 when a colleague alerted Glenn to a hidden Ring camera, cleverly disguised with tape and initially placed behind a computer. It was later repositioned atop a cabinet, still focused on Glenn’s desk and that of another colleague, according to court documents filed on September 27.
Glenn asserts that she had no previous knowledge of or consent for the surveillance, which she believes breached her right to privacy. The covert monitoring came as a shock and immediately raised concerns over its legality and the intent behind it.
The New Jersey Board of Tree Experts, an agency established in 1940 and tasked with regulating tree care practices across the state, has yet to comment on the allegations. The board falls under the oversight of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, particularly after the Tree Expert & Tree Care Operator Licensing Act took effect in January 2010, enhancing the board’s regulatory duties.
Glenn’s lawsuit also highlights contentious justifications for the camera’s installation. Board upper management purportedly claimed the surveillance device was needed to monitor Alcoholics Anonymous meetings occasionally held at the office. Recording such meetings, however, is cited in the lawsuit as an illegal act, reinforcing the problematic nature of the camera’s deployment.
Moreover, Glenn contends that the camera’s presence in her workspace was not only improper but explicitly targeted her. This, she claims, constituted intentional and discriminatory surveillance. The lawsuit reveals that some board members allegedly orchestrated the installation of the camera clandestinely to monitor Glenn, another staff member, and a third party without their knowledge.
This courtroom battle goes beyond privacy violations. It also encompasses claims of a deteriorating workplace environment exacerbated after Glenn, hired by the board in March 2023 as a manager, reported racially insensitive behavior and poor treatment of minority applicants by two white administrative assistants.
These assistants, known as “the sisters,” allegedly made derogatory remarks about Hispanic license applicants and resisted following new procedures implemented by Glenn, according to the lawsuit.
Following her complaints about the discriminatory behavior and unlawful surveillance, Glenn alleges the board subjected her to various forms of retaliation. These included restricting her remote work access, reducing her working hours, and openly criticizing her within email communications to staff.
The emotional toll from these events led Glenn to resign in December 2023. Her legal claims encompass lost wages, emotional distress, and punitive damages. She accuses the tree board of creating a hostile work environment, violating New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination, and breaching the Conscientious Employee Protection Act.
Glenn’s lawsuit sheds light on significant issues of workplace privacy, discrimination, and corporate governance within a state regulatory board. As the legal proceedings progress, the outcome could reshape policies on employee surveillance and reinforce discrimination laws within New Jersey’s workplaces.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by Open AI and might contain inaccuracies regarding people, facts, circumstances, and the story. Any request for article removal, retraction, or correction can be directed via email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.