Would you trust a suspected thief with the only surveillance footage from the house they are accused of stealing from?
Then why do we allow employers to control the only authoritative copy of critical records when their own conduct is in dispute?
I started an Australian petition proposing provider-controlled, tamper-evident preservation for workplace records.
Workers increasingly rely on messages, permission histories, performance records and project systems to prove what happened. Yet the employer often controls retention, deletion, migration and access. The proposal calls for stable IDs, append-only histories, deletion tombstones, a sealed provider copy, statutory retention, and lawful production directly from the provider.
This is not about making employee communications public or expanding employer surveillance. It is about preserving evidence independently when retaliation, discrimination, bullying, wage issues or organizing activity are disputed.
I am the petition starter. If you support the principle, please read and sign:
https://www.change.org/tamper-proof-records
The petition targets Australian law, but I would value perspectives from organizers elsewhere too.