Breach of confidentiality by employer

Uncertain

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

Personal Information has been disclosed! my discliplinary is classed as sensitive personal information and as I've said umpteen times they have breached their own policy and also the data protection act.

"Why not? Perhaps what you did has had a detrimental effect to the company and that with the clients knowing you have left, they will stay customers. " No lol I didnt.

To put this in understandable terms for you, its like going to the Drs about an issue and then a friend or neighbour coming upto you and telling you what the DR said.

Sorry but you coming over as only wanting people to agree or sympathise with you rather than receive constructive advice!

You say you have consulted a solicitor, I hope you will listen to their advice with more of an open mind - even if it is not what you want to hear.

The medical analogy is not really relevant. There are specific laws to do with patient confidentiality so it is not a direct comparison.

I am not an expert on the data protection act so I can't comment on whether or not it has been broken or, more important, whether there is any useful remedy for you even if it has. My gut feeling is that the most that is likely to happen is that the firm gets a slap on the wrist.

I'm not 100% clear if the information that you say has been "leaked" is true, partially true or false? Assuming for the moment it is broadly true then your only possible argument is that either it breached your right to privacy (a minefield) or that they were somehow contractually bound to keep it confidential.

To be blunt, the current "judge made" privacy laws, like libel and slander, are only realistically available to the very rich. OK, that stinks, but it is a fact.

Also, a firm can vary or change its policies more or less as it likes so that leaves us with have they breached any contract? Unless you have a piece of paper where they have agreed to keep something confidential I suspect you are going to struggle.

That, for what it is worth is my view, take it on board or ignore it as you please.

Emmzi

DC, it depends what they are saying and if it is true.

If you were sacked, they may be saying something like "we agreed it was best to part company" which the client will then interpret as "sacked".

They are not actually saying anything not true. But woithout more details can't advise of they are doing anything illegal. Like as not you don't have the cash to get them to stop it anyway so I'd ask them to stop it, it'll have the same effect as months traipsing through court.

2sides2everystory

Hammyman wrote: »

This can include the fact they sacked the employee for misconduct.

This is what is so frequently abused - the misconduct cr*p that is used to smear people first out of their job and then out of any fair chance of getting another.

Kangaroo courts sit in their thousands up and down the land daily. They largely comprise breaches of natural justice and are usually conducted by people who are so misguided as to believe English Premiership football is a thing to be proud of too.

It is gross (almost always because that gets you out faster).

JonathanStewart

RobertoMoir wrote: »

I'm not so sure about that. They can say what they wish providing its "true, accurate and fair".

not sure i entirely agree

a reference should also be given without malice - and this is where an ex employer can be taken to task because if they understand that their comments will sabotage that persons chance of getting a job it can be considered a malicious reference.

JonathanStewart

Emmzi wrote: »

DC, it depends what they are saying and if it is true.

If you were sacked, they may be saying something like "we agreed it was best to part company" which the client will then interpret as "sacked".

They are not actually saying anything not true. But woithout more details can't advise of they are doing anything illegal. Like as not you don't have the cash to get them to stop it anyway so I'd ask them to stop it, it'll have the same effect as months traipsing through court.

again as ive mentioned above an employer *could* be described as being malicious if they give out a reference that they are sure will sabotage that ex employees chance of getting a job.

and why asking them to stop have any effect? there are no negative consequences for them if they continue.

Uncertain

JonathanStewart wrote: »

again as ive mentioned above an employer *could* be described as being malicious if they give out a reference that they are sure will sabotage that ex employees chance of getting a job.

and why asking them to stop have any effect? there are no negative consequences for them if they continue.

Not if what they say is true and not misleading. Providing it passes that test then the consequences are irrelevant.

Emmzi

JonathanStewart wrote: »

again as ive mentioned above an employer *could* be described as being malicious if they give out a reference that they are sure will sabotage that ex employees chance of getting a job.

and why asking them to stop have any effect? there are no negative consequences for them if they continue.

I'm not talking about references. I'm talking about general converation.

"Isn't dandelion in today?"
"No, she doesn't work here any more."
"Why?"
"We agreed it was best to part company."

Why would asking them to stop have an effect - because they may be decent people who don't realise the impact their words are having? And because there is nothing to lose in asking.

The world is not all about the letter of the law, confrontation, and court.

JonathanStewart

Emmzi wrote: »

I'm not talking about references. I'm talking about general converation.

"Isn't dandelion in today?"
"No, she doesn't work here any more."
"Why?"
"We agreed it was best to part company."

Why would asking them to stop have an effect - because they may be decent people who don't realise the impact their words are having? And because there is nothing to lose in asking.

The world is not all about the letter of the law, confrontation, and court.

thats fine *if* the conversation went that way.

its the OP's job to find out (as they are kind of hinting in the original post) if the ex-employer is directly contacting prospective new employers themselves and instigating these types of conversations

i.e.

'i know something about dandelion who you are planning to hire, we agreed to let them go because we thought it best we part company'

i would suggest that if op parted on bad terms with these people, there is no reason why they wouldnt continue. people can be very petty.

Emmzi

JonathanStewart wrote: »

its the OP's job to find out (as they are kind of hinting in the original post) if the ex-employer is directly contacting prospective new employers themselves and instigating these types of conversations

I didn't get that hint at all. Let's let the OP tell us what has happened instead of speculating.

Are you Milkshock?

JonathanStewart

Emmzi wrote: »

I didn't get that hint at all. Let's let the OP tell us what has happened instead of speculating.

Are you Milkshock?

OP says:

My ex employer has been going round telling people that I have been sacked when it was no buisness of these people.(not new employers)

now we dont know whether this is actually happening or not, but what if it is what is happening? is it still above board?

and no im not milkshock.