Again that is the entire point of preparing for the disciplinary process.
It may prove entirely unnecessary to have a hearing, and a hearing can allow
an employee to go forward without a stain on their character or record, but
the preparations for it concentrate the minds of the parties involved.
The circumstances you state may well exist and may well be a 100% valid
defence. If so that is a good thing. If they do not then the mere fact
that the employer is marshalling its forces to investigate this formally is
a good tactical step in defending its position.
If one can ask "By what authority did you pass this personal data to that
party?" and get a valid answer that is enshrined in the employer's policies
and other legal documents that defends that passing of data then the
employee is blameless. One may have a different argument then about the
validity of the polices and legal terms relied on, but that is the
employer's issue, not the employee's
I can say that I do not like disciplinary processes, ether as an employer or
as an employee, but they are sometimes necessary, the more so when one has
to defend against a serious external complaint.
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kirsty Gray
Sent: 09 February 2006 14:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Letter of complaint and DP
Shouldn't the employer check not only policies on (voluntary) disclosure of
information to third parties BUT ALSO the terms & conditions of the tenancy,
shared-ownership agreement, lease, freehold or whatever?
There may be clause stating that non-payment of rent, ground rent, service
charges will be reported to other interested parties - such as mortgage
holder. This was certainly the case in leases for 100s of ex-council flats
sold under RTB that I managed back in the early 90s.
If recovery action was likely to result in eviction / repossession, we wrote
to the mortgage lender offering them the opportunity to pay the debt to
avoid action - and the risk of loss of their security. Up to them thereafter
how they recovered the debt from their client.
In which case, regardless of whether the warning letter to the tenant
mentioned the dislosure or not, surely the employee has done nothing wrong -
schedule 2 condition 6(1) and maybe condition 2(a) could apply depending on
circumstances?
Just a thought before we dispatch this hapless employee to the dole queue!
Kirsty E Gray
Access to Information Advisor
Commission for Social Care Inspection
Note: comments for discussion and debate only and do not necessarily
reflect the corporate position of CSCI nor constitute legal advice.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<li><a
href="mailto:data-protection-request@jiscmail.ac.uk">Email
list owner(s)</a>
<li><a href="http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/data-protection">File area for the
list</a>
<li><a href="../cgi-bin/surveys.cgi?A=hp&LMGT1=data-protection">Surveys</a>
<li><a href="../cgi-bin/discuss.cgi?data-protection">Discussion Room</a> (<a href="http://realchat.jiscmail.ac.uk/techfaq.htm">Help</a>)
<p>
>>> Error in line 102 of DATA-PROTECTION.MAILTPL: DDname "&DD" not found <<<
-> .DD &DD <-
