My boss forwarded personal details to my colleagues

Stanford

givyjoe wrote: »

I see. Anywho, folks suggesting making a big deal about this are absolutely on another planet. Simply talk to the boss and say they saw the emails being forwarded and ask why it was done. No good reason, politely ask for it not to happen again should there be no appropriate reason. A little bit of common sense is needed here, going in guns blazing talking of gdpr etc will not end well for the op.

Why do we enact privacy legislation if we are going to take the Irish situation and ignore it?

runawaybishop

Stanford wrote: »

Why do we enact privacy legislation if we are going to take the Irish situation and ignore it?

Because sometimes the nuclear option shouldn't be the first port of call.

givyjoe

runawaybishop wrote: »

Because sometimes the nuclear option shouldn't be the first port of call.

Precisely, it's not 'irish' or any such nonsense. It's still the op's boss. Going nuclear on your boss and you can expect some kind of consequences in the future.

Stanford

runawaybishop wrote: »

Because sometimes the nuclear option shouldn't be the first port of call.

Agreed but there is general agreement on this thread that sensitive information was badly handled, a complaint to HR pointing this out is hardly nuclear

givyjoe

Stanford wrote: »

Agreed but there is general agreement on this thread that sensitive information was badly handled, a complaint to HR pointing this out is hardly nuclear

It's hardly a common sense approach either, potentially landing your boss in it without even speaking to them first. Every time a rule is bent or broken, would you go straight to hr above your bosses head?

Stanford

givyjoe wrote: »

It's hardly a common sense approach either, potentially landing your boss in it without even speaking to them first. Every time a rule is bent or broken, would you go straight to hr above your bosses head?

Fair point, perhaps an e-mail to the boss in a non-threatening manner is appropriate without copying HR, it gives the boss time to respond or invite discussion and is on record, the reply will tell a lot assuming that mail is not forwarded also.!!

Gwen Cooper

Stanford wrote: »

Fair point, perhaps an e-mail to the boss in a non-threatening manner is appropriate without copying HR, it gives the boss time to respond or invite discussion and is on record, the reply will tell a lot assuming that mail is not forwarded also.!!

If OP decides to speak to the boss first, I agree that it should be done by email, so the conversation is recorded. If it goes wrong, they can always show that they tried to resolve it with the manager directly first.

WhiteMemento9

givyjoe wrote: »

I see. Anywho, folks suggesting making a big deal about this are absolutely on another planet. Simply talk to the boss and say they saw the emails being forwarded and ask why it was done. No good reason, politely ask for it not to happen again should there be no appropriate reason. A little bit of common sense is needed here, going in guns blazing talking of gdpr etc will not end well for the op.

The fact that one of the staff felt comfortable enough to mail the boss back with quite a nasty reply would tell me all I need to know about the bosses relationship to sending the email in the first place.

bobsman

Stanford wrote: »

OP could you answer this please

I do not know.

Stanford

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

The fact that one of the staff felt comfortable enough to mail the boss back with quite a nasty reply would tell me all I need to know about the bosses relationship to sending the email in the first place.

Agreed but OP needs to show that he acted reasonably and gave the boss ample opportunity to address the matter

Stanford

bobsman wrote: »

I do not know.

Since you have access to the boss's e-mail can you get hard copies of it being set to others and the insulting reply before the mails are "accidentially" deleted?

dudara

JDxtra wrote: »

Probably should have just called in sick.

Or said nothing in the email. You sent the details, it's reasonable to expect they may be forwarded.

It’s actually not reasonable, not at all. Personal details like reasons for sick leave should only be shared with authorised personnel such as HR or immediate managers. Sharing with anyone else is a data breach.

WhiteMemento9

Stanford wrote: »

Agreed but OP needs to show that he acted reasonably and gave the boss ample opportunity to address the matter

I am not sure exactly how he should be allowed to address it himself. The problem IMO should be dealt with by a 3rd party. If it was a mistake then I would be totally with you but this was something which looks malicious/bullying and shouldn't be addressed by the person involved.

Stanford

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

I am not sure exactly how he should be allowed to address it himself. The problem IMO should be dealt with by a 3rd party. If it was a mistake then I would be totally with you but this was something which looks malicious/bullying and shouldn't be addressed by the person involved.

I am not suggesting that "he should be allowed to address it himself.", if the matter is ever the subject of an internal complaint or a complaint under GDPR then OP needs to show that he engaged with the company first, he doesn't necessarily have to accept anything the boss says

bobsman

Stanford.. sorry, fired off too quickly !!

Assistants are given access to all Director's emails. All directors are instructed not to discuss employees via email with each or personal matters. If directors need to discuss staff, they do it face to face or by text (using company phones).

I have access to my boss's email as he may need me to look up correspondence sent/received from a client, etc...

Franz Von Peppercorn

professore wrote: »

I think some people are in strong denial about GDPR.

Firstly the boss needed a GOOD BUSINESS REASON to share with colleagues why the OP was out. I don't see that here. He could have informed them that the OP was off sick. That was enough for them to work around any absence and plan accordingly. Absolutely zero need to share the reason behind it.
Strike 1.

Secondly, the OP was out because of a health issue of their child. There is a whole section on the protection of children's information and also on medical records, both of which meet an even higher standard than personal information such as name, date of birth etc of adults. Strike 2.

By the way I don't see this as some endorsement of the GDPR. The GDPR is a legal nightmare and a huge liability for business.

I've discussed with Germans about GDPR and they are taking it to the nth degree over there, even to the extent of blocking internet access for their employees.

I’ve read the GDPR. I didn’t see much in there about bosses telling employees who is out or not. Some companies would broadcast that to everybody (in an out of office calendar).

The GPDR is about protecting information of customers , and it’s often has opt out clauses for business or finance necessity.

WhiteMemento9

Stanford wrote: »

I am not suggesting that "he should be allowed to address it himself.", if the matter is ever the subject of an internal complaint or a complaint under GDPR then OP needs to show that he engaged with the company first, he doesn't necessarily have to accept anything the boss says

I think it is entirely reasonable to say after the email exchange that he/she didn't feel comfortable engaging with the boss. I think that is putting undue duress on the employee in a situation they didn't contribute towards.

Stanford

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

I think it is entirely reasonable to say after the email exchange that he/she didn't feel comfortable engaging with the boss. I think that is putting undue duress on the employee in a situation they didn't contribute towards.

As I said its more about procedure than expecting a result from the boss, after many years of dealing with IR matters I can say that the first thing any arbitrator/third party will ask is was the matter raised with the company, it can be raised but OP does not have to be happy with the outcome

bobsman

The two recipients are not on my team. No reason whatsoever they need to know if I'm absent or not.

I will approach him. I'm just worried he will come back at me with some bull**** about going through his emails.

Stanford

bobsman wrote: »

The two recipients are not on my team. No reason whatsoever they need to know if I'm absent or not.

I will approach him. I'm just worried he will come back at me with some bull**** about going through his emails.

I strongly suggest that you e-mail him referring to the matter briefly and requesting a meeting to cover yourself and have a record if you decide to go further

WhiteMemento9

Stanford wrote: »

As I said its more about procedure than expecting a result from the boss, after many years of dealing with IR matters I can say that the first thing any arbitrator/third party will ask is was the matter raised with the company, it can be raised but OP does not have to be happy with the outcome

I get the practicality of what you are saying but putting the onus on the employee to deal directly with someone I would clearly feel uncomfortable engaging after this incident after already being subject to the incident itself seems like cruel and usual punishment. It almost feels like a practice to deter people and hope most of this stuff gets swept under the rug and people who act like him get away with it more often than not.

Stanford

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

I get the practicality of what you are saying but putting the onus on the employee to deal directly with someone I would clearly feel uncomfortable engaging after this incident after already being subject to the incident itself seems like cruel and usual punishment. It almost feels like a practice to deter people and hope most of this stuff gets swept under the rug and people who act like him get away with it more often than not.

Agree entirely but lodging a complaint outside without exhausting internal discussion never bodes well unpleasant and all that it is

givyjoe

Stanford wrote: »

Agree entirely but lodging a complaint outside without exhausting internal discussion never bodes well unpleasant and all that it is

Particularly keeping mind that this is a director. Can of worms either way. Ultimately what does the op want from this, not for it to happen again and not suffer any potential repurcussions? Best bet is to try and sort it with director. Firmly tell them that you would prefer that they didn't share personal details unnecessarily. Then take it from there.

WhiteMemento9

givyjoe wrote: »

Particularly keeping mind that this is a director. Can of worms either way. Ultimately what does the op want from this, not for it to happen again and not suffer any potential repurcussions? Best bet is to try and sort it with director. Firmly tell them that you would prefer that they didn't share personal details unnecessarily. Then take it from there.

The personal details thing wouldn't actually bother me all that much. I could get on board with the idea of sorting that out directly with him as I can see how it could have been a genuine mistake and while maybe a breach of confidentiality common sense would prevail in sorting it out with him. Where this gets more complicated is from the fact that an employee feels comfortable enough to email him back the nasty reply which tells me quite a bit about the nature of what was going on and why I would feel uncomfortable addressing it with him.

givyjoe

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

The personal details thing wouldn't actually bother me all that much. I could get on board with the idea of sorting that out directly with him as I can see how it could have been a genuine mistake and while maybe a breach of confidentiality common sense would prevail in sorting it out with him. Where this gets more complicated is from the fact that an employee feels comfortable enough to email him back the nasty reply which tells me quite a bit about the nature of what was going on and why I would feel uncomfortable addressing it with him.

Did the director themselves engage in the nasty comments? Did he just ignore them, did he stop back and forth once they were made? He can't really be held responsible for what they say, only for inappropriately sharing the absence info, which is all I'd address with him if he's innocent of making nasty comments. Not defending him for sharing, but unless he made inappropriate comments too, can't pull him on that aspect.

He'll know you've seen the comments from others.

Stanford

givyjoe wrote: »

Did the director themselves engage in the nasty comments? Did he just ignore them, did he stop back and forth once they were made? He can't really be held responsible for what they say, only for inappropriately sharing the absence info, which is all I'd address with him if he's innocent of making nasty comments. Not defending him for sharing, but unless he made inappropriate comments too, can't pull him on that aspect.

He'll know you've seen the comments from others.

Unfortunately OP can't have it both ways, in complaining to his boss he leaves himself open to counter accusations of reading private e-mails etc.

mvl

While I am respectful about the reason OP had to take one day off, am I the only one questioning the procedures for taking leave in that company: mail would not be accepted in the company I work for, we'd need to ring in (when we have emergencies).
- Then, is OP entitled to taking short notice paid leave due to a child being ill - or did the manager do some favor to OP by accepting the leave ?
- Similar to other replies above, IMO everything about children is sensitive information: why would someone mail about it to ppl in work ? I've always disliked seeing mails with "sick child" included in the leave reason - I find such mails less professional.

So I don't concur with the advice about going to HR, and the likes (GDPR) : OP made some mistakes in my view, there are consequences to everything we do. I would keep a note to self about it for next time, and try to prevent more gossip. Just saying - maybe there are other mails OP didn't see ...or was not supposed to see.

givyjoe

Stanford wrote: »

Unfortunately OP can't have it both ways, in complaining to his boss he leaves himself open to counter accusations of reading private e-mails etc.

Precisely, but that applies to talking to director or HR. So the options or taking action one way or another (boss or HR) or just let it go.

bobsman

givyjoe wrote: »

Did the director themselves engage in the nasty comments? Did he just ignore them, did he stop back and forth once they were made? He can't really be held responsible for what they say, only for inappropriately sharing the absence info, which is all I'd address with him if he's innocent of making nasty comments. Not defending him for sharing, but unless he made inappropriate comments too, can't pull him on that aspect.

He'll know you've seen the comments from others.

I didn't see. I Didn't want to look. I can't imagine he would. It would be extremely stupid of him.

WhiteMemento9

givyjoe wrote: »

Did the director themselves engage in the nasty comments? Did he just ignore them, did he stop back and forth once they were made? He can't really be held responsible for what they say, only for inappropriately sharing the absence info, which is all I'd address with him if he's innocent of making nasty comments. Not defending him for sharing, but unless he made inappropriate comments too, can't pull him on that aspect.

He'll know you've seen the comments from others.

This is why it gets complicated. People don't send those kinds of emails to their boss unless they are sure the relationship between them allows those kinds of comments to be made which is where I have the real problem here. It can easily be deflected by the silly excuses that you are making for the boss not replying but we all are aware of the nuance that allows that email to the boss.

I am not the OP so I don't know if any further flow happened in the conversation. They would be some of the dumbest people alive to have continued it over company email that the OP has access to.