Should I be worried?

ohreally

Could colleague have transmitted to the man in question?

Hedgehog99

No, you shouldn't have told the two others, but what surprises me the most is that when Ms Promiscuous got to hear about it, that she made a formal complaint, i.e. had to admit to the bosses what she'd done! I'd have thought she'd have kept quiet and booked herself in for some tests - unless she's in denial.

pinkshoes

The OP clearly did what they felt was right. Too late for hindsight...

FACT: It is important for this woman to know she has an STI.

The bloke obviously didn't want to talk to her again, so opted for the next best thing. The OP clearly didn't want to talk to her either, so did what she felt was best too.

If this becomes formal, I would just stick to the facts, make it clear that you felt it important that she should know about her STI, but did not feel comfortable telling her yourself so opted for a friend who would tell her.

You may not like the woman, but were concerned for her health. End of story.

Bogalot

Hedgehog99 wrote: »

No, you shouldn't have told the two others, but what surprises me the most is that when Ms Promiscuous got to hear about it, that she made a formal complaint, i.e. had to admit to the bosses what she'd done! I'd have thought she'd have kept quiet and booked herself in for some tests - unless she's in denial.

On the basis of your argument people should keep quiet if they're bullied for having caught HIV or Hepatitis through their sexual behaviour.

People should not be shamed for their life choices, whether you agree with them or not.

Hedgehog99

Bogalot wrote: »

On the basis of your argument people should keep quiet if they're bullied for having caught HIV or Hepatitis through their sexual behaviour.

People should not be shamed for their life choices, whether you agree with them or not.

No, that would be different. In this case, the colleague with the STI would have to tell her boss the full story in order to complain about the OP and the OP says her intentions were genuinely for the woman's health.

Someone having caught HIV or hepatitis at some time in their sexual life and then getting bullied for it of course means the bullies would deserve to be punished.

sangie595

Goodness grief, is this the dark ages? What is all this bandying about of "promiscuous" as though that matters one iota? If she has a healthy sex life and is happy with it, then that is life.

Stripping out all the judgements on all sides, and getting down to the employment facts:
The OP told two people, whose business it was not, that another colleague may have an STD. The person about whom this gossip occurred has heard the gossip and put in a formal complaint. This is a very serious matter and yes, it could lead to a serious warning or even dismissal. It may have been an innocent mistake, but it was a very serious innocent mistake. And one that could blow up to an even bigger innocent mistake. because heh - this "very married" guy (who I assume is not promiscuous? But happened to have managed to pick up an STD whilst "very married"? From a toilet seat, no doubt. I always thought that was a myth.) is going to be willing to pop along to a disciplinary and admit that the whole thing is true? Because if not this has every reason to end up being malicious gossip in the eyes of the employer. Especially since this is not the first "spat" - i.e. there has been previous trouble in the workplace and these two have now attracted the employers attention not once, but twice.

So we have "not a one-off" incident, and a serious allegation with witnesses to back her up and none to back you up. I think the absolute truth, and a lot of grovelling apologies, might save your job. But be very clear - this is, without any doubt, an action which could be viewed as gross misconduct, and could result in your dismissal, If it doesn't, my best advice is to never come to the attention of your employers again. Because I don't think they'll stand a third time.

sangie595

Hedgehog99 wrote: »

No, that would be different. In this case, the colleague with the STI would have to tell her boss the full story in order to complain about the OP .

No they don't. For a start off, nobody knows whether she has contracted an STD or not, and it is nobody's business whether she has or not. She has complained that a colleague has told two other colleagues that she has or may have an STD. That is all she need tell the employer because it is the only thing that is any of the employers business. This is an investigation into the conduct of the OP - not the complainant!

Bogalot

Hedgehog99 wrote: »

No, that would be different. In this case, the colleague with the STI would have to tell her boss the full story in order to complain about the OP and the OP says her intentions were genuinely for the woman's health.

Someone having caught HIV or hepatitis at some time in their sexual life and then getting bullied for it of course means the bullies would deserve to be punished.

What if "the STI" is HIV? Why should an individual be put in a situation that they would have to explain their sexual activity outside of work to their employer?

It is difficult to believe that someone as judgmental as the OP can be seen to be acting out of concern for her ex friend. Given their history, and if the OP uses the same language as she has here, I doubt it will wash with the employer either.

xapprenticex

WAT!!! you told people at work that your ex friend may have STD's.

hope you learn from this, cant make this stuff up..

Raspberry_Queen

I think it might be an exaggeration to call it a "very serious" mistake. She's naively spread a bit of gossip, not accidentally burned the building down! I agree that some serious grovelling is in order, though.