Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

GDPR issue in Pharmacy

24

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,467 ✭✭✭jimmynokia


    Well if x is telling y stuff and posts on Facebook gossip knows what else she is at. This is wrong. Certainly something to take up with the pharmacy group


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,223 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Ok so GDPR may, or may not, be the wrong term to use. But this is more than 'everyone knows everyone'. It's about somebody working in a business talking to others about people or events pertaining to the business and that should not be broadcast on social media. As for sorting it with the person, why should the OP do that? The employer can sort it with them. I don't think the OP is necessarily going the data protection route but is simply looking for action as a result of highly unprofessional behaviour by a staff member.

    But the employer has nothing to do with the person who said it on Facebook and has way more to lose if they accused their employee without any evidence on the basis of hearsay.

    There are two issues. OP should complain to owner of being treated discourteously.

    OP should deal with Facebook poster separately.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,293 ✭✭✭Princess Calla


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    You need to read the OP. Sales assistant didn't post anything. A 3rd party did. The only thing posted was not to use this particular pharmacy. Message didn't come from the shop or sales assistant.

    First there is no proof that sales assistant has anything to do with it and second there is no proof that the information was gathered in another way. The information posted identified OP as a client of the pharmacy but anyone seeking OP enter the shop will have this information. The information gathered by the shop, medical records & address haven't been shared.

    The third party wasn't in the pharmacy, therefore there is no way they could know about the incident unless the sales assistant told them.

    Now I get the sales assistant having a vent at home but you leave it at "a customer made a complaint about me.." you don't name the customer.

    The sales assistant has conducted herself in far from a professional manner. She has been caught out this time but I doubt this is the first time she has acted inappropriately.

    If you go into a pharmacy for medication etc the last thing you need to be worrying about is if this is going to be tonight's grapevine fodder!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Like I said too, If she doesn’t like me that’s fine, she shouldn’t have approached me with the sole intention of being rude. I tried address it with the person who posted it up online, she screenshot my message and posted it up online too. She sent me a message then telling me to “leave my in laws in peace”.

    I have nothing to do with her in laws, I only know the pharmacy lady from the chemist and to be honest, have absolutely no problem with her outside this incident


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Yes, the 3rd party used telepathy to know what had happened in the chemists. It's clear the staff member went the cheap gossiping route.

    The third party wasn't in the pharmacy, therefore there is no way they could know about the incident unless the sales assistant told them.

    Unless I missed something here all op has said is that people on Facebook stated on Facebook that op needs to find another pharmacy. I didn't read how they gave an account of what happened in the shop on Facebook?

    Let's be very clear here, the fact that someone uses a particular pharmacy can be public knowledge. You don't need to be a staff member to have this information. None of OPs information stored by the pharmacy was leaked or misused. There is not a hope in hell of getting a ruling in the favour of the op on gdpr legislation.

    Op should go to shop owner and tell what happened with screen shots. No shop owner wants a client told not to come back to the store. I have not doubt shop owner will take action in this case but shouting GDPR will not get OP anywhere.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Like I said too, If she doesn’t like me that’s fine, she shouldn’t have approached me with the sole intention of being rude. I tried address it with the person who posted it up online, she screenshot my message and posted it up online too. She sent me a message then telling me to “leave my in laws in peaceâ€.


    They sound like scumbags who use social media for bullying


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Unless I missed something here all op has said is that people on Facebook stated on Facebook that op needs to find another pharmacy. I didn't read how they gave an account of what happened in the shop on Facebook?

    Let's be very clear here, the fact that someone uses a particular pharmacy can be public knowledge. You don't need to be a staff member to have this information. None of OPs information stored by the pharmacy was leaked or misused. There is not a hope in hell of getting a ruling in the favour of the op on gdpr legislation.

    Op should go to shop owner and tell what happened with screen shots. No shop owner wants a client told not to come back to the store. I have not doubt shop owner will take action in this case but shouting GDPR will not get OP anywhere.
    Considering I no longer live locally to the chemist, (think 30 miles away) and work elsewhere too, and happened to be back in that pharmacy specifically 4 days before she made the comment, I think it’s safe to say it was divulged I was there, and following it up with “leave my in laws in peace” cements the fact she knows what went on and she has no right to, much less broadcast it on social media.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    They sound like scumbags who use social media for bullying

    I’d say it’s more jealousy than bullying but you’re right, she broadcasts everything on her social media and then plays the victim.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,293 ✭✭✭Princess Calla


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Unless I missed something here all op has said is that people on Facebook stated on Facebook that op needs to find another pharmacy. I didn't read how they gave an account of what happened in the shop on Facebook?

    Let's be very clear here, the fact that someone uses a particular pharmacy can be public knowledge. You don't need to be a staff member to have this information. None of OPs information stored by the pharmacy was leaked or misused. There is not a hope in hell of getting a ruling in the favour of the op on gdpr legislation.

    Op should go to shop owner and tell what happened with screen shots. No shop owner wants a client told not to come back to the store. I have not doubt shop owner will take action in this case but shouting GDPR will not get OP anywhere.

    You missed something.... :) it was the sales assistants, brothers girlfriend that posted it on Facebook. I don't think it's a big jump into the unknown to guess the sales assistant had a gossip session at the dinner table.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Considering I no longer live locally to the chemist, (think 30 miles away) and work elsewhere too, and happened to be back in that pharmacy specifically 4 days before she made the comment, I think it’s safe to say it was divulged I was there, and following it up with “leave my in laws in peace†cements the fact she knows what went on and she has no right to, much less broadcast it on social media.

    I get all of that and she should be sacked. You have been treated badly as a customer. I have no doubt that the owner will want to hear about this and I have no doubt that they will take action. I'm just pointing out that it's not a GDPR breach.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Oh and I totally accept that now. When I was googling what this was, because my name is “personal data” and my personal data was carried outside the chemist to be used in gossip, followed by online assaults, or bullying, made me think it was a gdpr issue but I totally understand that it may not be.


  • Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,781 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    The irony of people tut tutting and saying things like "read up on GDPR before you bandy the term about" etc is delicious.

    As ever the cluelessness around GDPR abounds amongst the amateur enthusiasts.

    This is squarely and 100% a GDPR issue. It just also happens to be problematic for the pharmacy for numerous other reasons such as straightforward patient confidentiality and customer service.

    But it is a GDPR issue too. And a serious one. I'm not surprised the pharmacy owner is taking it seriously because they are potentially in hot water on a number of fronts here.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    I find it depressing the way people rushed to defend the chemist because it's a wing of the Medical establishment of this country.


    People always side with the big boys in Ireland.


    File an immediate case with the Data Protection Commission and teach people on here a lesson!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    The owner was very nice and took this very seriously when I spoke to him and I don’t want to damage his business without giving him the opportunity to remedy the situation. I’m sure they all have a bitch about customers from time to time but he couldn’t control the third party posting it to Facebook.

    I will meet with him and if I’m not satisfied with what he has to say, I’ll be filing a case with the psi and the data commissioner


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 702 ✭✭✭Portsalon



    File an immediate case with the Data Protection Commission and teach people on here a lesson!

    Great idea - Bugsy Dixon needs more real work to stop her from her moronic grandstanding about the PSC!

    Incidentally, how exactly will the filing of a complaint to the DPC teach us a lesson?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    Portsalon wrote: »
    Great idea - Bugsy Dixon needs more real work to stop her from her moronic grandstanding about the PSC!

    Incidentally, how exactly will the filing of a complaint to the DPC teach us a lesson?


    Because you lot were falsely claiming it was not a GDPR issue, hoping the complainant would just slink away and drop the case.



    It was a serious data breach and needs to be reported.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 702 ✭✭✭Portsalon



    Because you lot were falsely claiming it was not a GDPR issue, hoping the complainant would just slink away and drop the case.

    I see.

    Now, let's try again: how exactly will the filing of a complaint to the DPC teach us a lesson?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,552 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    I can't see that the Pharmacy manager has any option but to terminate the employment of the gossip, if they confirm the OPs assertions. Not only are they breaching medical confidentiality, their actions are bordering on libelous, if not fully so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    But it is a GDPR issue too. And a serious one. I'm not surprised the pharmacy owner is taking it seriously because they are potentially in hot water on a number of fronts here.


    You are mistaken on this. What personal data that was collected by the business do you think was shared or stored incorrectly?

    Stating that a named person frequents a shop isn't a GDPR breach. This is a fact that can be observed by anyone in the street. None of OPs personal data was shared by the business.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    You are mistaken on this. What personal data that was collected by the business do you think was shared or stored incorrectly?

    Stating that a named person frequents a shop isn't a GDPR breach. This is a fact that can be observed by anyone in the street. None of OPs personal data was shared by the business.


    This is hilarious.


    A member of staff shared with a third party what was supposed to be a fully confidential interaction, who then harassed the customer on Facebook.


    MASSIVE GDPR BREACH!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    You are mistaken on this. What personal data that was collected by the business do you think was shared or stored incorrectly?

    Stating that a named person frequents a shop isn't a GDPR breach. This is a fact that can be observed by anyone in the street. None of OPs personal data was shared by the business.

    My name?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    This is hilarious.


    A member of staff shared with a third party what was supposed to be a fully confidential interaction, who then harassed the customer on Facebook.


    MASSIVE GDPR BREACH!

    What information other than the OP was present in the pharmacy was shared?

    Ones attendance in a public space is not protected under GDPR.
    The actions of the assistant and the sisters, brothers, girlfriend...
    In gossiping are stupid, and even more so in the part of the assistant possibly grounds for dismissal as misconduct.

    Without meaning to be dickish about it, there is only 1 side of the story presented and the assistant may have a much different perception of how the interaction unfolded and is entitled to a right of reply to her employer.

    There was no confidential information shared in the interaction in store, nor in the disclosure that the OP was in store as no actual transaction took place.

    Going by the OPs story, the assistant is a Muppet and disciplinary action is warranted.
    A complaint to the ODPC however is unwarranted and in any case would need to follow the pharmacy/shop complaint process 1st and can only be forwarded to the ODPC for their consideration once a final written response on the matter has issued from the Pharmacy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    My attendance wasn’t the issue, the issue is my complaint was shared which was made privately with the pharmacist/manager who spoke to the staff member in question, who shared it with her friend who shared it publicly on Facebook.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    A member of staff shared with a third party what was supposed to be a fully confidential interaction, who then harassed the customer on Facebook.


    Someone shopping in a particular store is not fully confidential interaction. Did OP wear false beard and wig to hide their identity going into the shop?

    So far OP hasn't posted that any personal information /data stored by the store has been shared. Fifty people could have seen OP walk into the store. If someone posted that OP bought condoms or medicine that could be a breach but to suggest stating that someone was seen in a public place is a GDPR breach is totally off the wall.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Someone shopping in a particular store is not fully confidential interaction. Did OP wear false beard and wig to hide their identity going into the shop?

    So far OP hasn't posted that any personal information /data stored by the store has been shared. Fifty people could have seen OP walk into the store. If someone posted that OP bought condoms or medicine that could be a breach but to suggest stating that someone was seen in a public place is a GDPR breach is totally off the wall.


    A pharmacy isn't a regular shop. Sensitive medical information is involved and so stricter standards apply.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    My attendance wasn’t the issue, the issue is my complaint was shared which was made privately with the pharmacist/manager who spoke to the staff member in question, who shared it with her friend who shared it publicly on Facebook.


    This is the first time I have seen this information. Are you now saying that your medical condition was shared? We are pages into this thread and this would be information I'd expect to see in the opening post tbh


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Someone shopping in a particular store is not fully confidential interaction. Did OP wear false beard and wig to hide their identity going into the shop?

    So far OP hasn't posted that any personal information /data stored by the store has been shared. Fifty people could have seen OP walk into the store. If someone posted that OP bought condoms or medicine that could be a breach but to suggest stating that someone was seen in a public place is a GDPR breach is totally off the wall.

    You don't seem to have grasped that a Private complaint was subsequently discussed with third parties and the OP was clearly identified. It was not something anybody could have just come across.

    And, it has been accepted that it is really a customer issue that a strong GDPR one. It needs following up regardless. Or would you advocate just letting that kind of behaviour go unchallenged?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,552 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    The Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland have a social media guide on their website, in which it states:
    Derogatory, unsubstantiated, unsustainable or personal comments about patients, colleagues, other healthcare professionals or your place of work should not be made. Pharmacists should not engage in behaviour that could be perceived as harassment or bullying.

    I am certain that any Pharmacist would consider that their employees would be subject to even higher standards of behaviour, to wit, never saying anything about what happens in connection to their employment to anyone outside of it. That would be a given for they themselves to be in compliance with the societies expectations of professional and personal conduct.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭Darc19


    Some posters are reading "pharmacy" and not reading the OP.

    The op was not getting any medical requirements and therefore no data was accessed by the sales assistant. It was purely a retail transaction and the assistant knew the op's name from either talking to her or through people they both knew.

    Therefore gdpr simply does not come into the equation.


    Now, if the OP went in with a prescription and the assistant took the details from that data source, it would be a gdpr matter. But they didn't, so gdpr is not breached.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    A pharmacy isn't a regular shop. Sensitive medical information is involved and so stricter standards apply.

    Hello! It's a public place.

    Attending a particular pharmacy is not personal data. At the end of the day everyone goes into a pharmacy. Mentioning a particular pharmacy isn't a breach of GDPR. If OP walks into the store then it's a public place & public information. Now OP seems to have waited till page seven of the thread to add that their medical condition has been shared. At least I think that is what they are saying. This is most definitely a GDPR breach if true but simply walking into the pharmacy isn't


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    This is the first time I have seen this information. Are you now saying that your medical condition was shared? We are pages into this thread and this would be information I'd expect to see in the opening post tbh

    No no, sorry if I’m not clear.
    I walked into the chemist. Lady approached me, I greeted her with hello and she responded and was really rude to me. I looked at her for a second and she was staring me down. I said, actually I’ll leave it. She replied “okay so” and I walked out. I rang pharmacy and spoke to manager who apologized and said she’d address it with staff member.

    Few days later staff members brothers girlfriend posted it publicly to find another chemist to torment and when I messaged her privately (naming the chemist asking when she became spokeswoman) she screenshot it and shared it on social media. She followed it up with “please leave my in laws alone”


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    You don't seem to have grasped that a Private complaint was subsequently discussed with third parties and the OP was clearly identified. It was not something anybody could have just come across.

    This is new information only provided by the OP recently and not in the opening pages where it should be


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    This is new information only provided by the OP recently and not in the opening pages where it should be

    No I definitely posted it, I just don’t know if I was clear.
    My prob isn’t that staff went home and said oh shoes was in today.

    My prob is she went home and gave the opinion I was being a torment and not leaving the staff member in peace


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭Darc19


    The op has me confused.

    If the information was information that was spread was information gathered by the staff member through the files of the pharmacy or other data source such as prescription note. It is a gdpr breach and very serious for that staff member.

    If the information was not obtained from the files of the pharmacy or something like a prescription and your name was known by the assistant anyway and no other details divulged, then it is not a gdpr breach as no saved data was accessed.


    Now you could really go for the jugular and say that such publication of a Facebook post was defamatory and as the assistant was the person who provided the defamatory information, you wish for a written Apology and a token of compensation from the assistant.

    Failing that, you will look at the legal route to obtain that apology.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,662 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    its hard to nail down if this is gdpr issue or not. obviously its a confidentiiality issue and other.
    if the OP has no contact to the woman inquestion then any info she has on her has come through her work at the pharmacy
    knowing the OP rules out gdpr somewhat in relation to the OPs name etc
    but the incident in the pharmacy is completely a work incedent.
    so even if the ops name or the fact she uses x pharmacy was widly known ,the incedent is very much covered by gdpr.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    The only reason she knows my name is through her work. I’ve been a customer of that chemist since before that girl and the brother even knew each other. She does not know me and has never met me outside of her job


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭Darc19


    I still think it's pulling at threads to say it's gdpr as it's only your name and nothing of a sensitive nature.

    She could have seen you in a Cafe and someone with her said, oh there's xxx.

    Or simply saw your name on a credit card you handed over, or many other scenarios.

    So stick with the customer service line and how you feel violated by the assistant giving such information to someone to post defamatory comment on Facebook.

    As you said it's the staff member that is the issue, so they should bear the brunt of any penalty


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    No no, sorry if I’m not clear. I walked into the chemist. Lady approached me, I greeted her with hello and she responded and was really rude to me. I looked at her for a second and she was staring me down. I said, actually I’ll leave it. She replied “okay so†and I walked out. I rang pharmacy and spoke to manager who apologized and said she’d address it with staff member.

    Not a GDPR breach then. You were in a public place & obviously this can't be confidential as anyone can see you enter & leave.

    I do totally agree that it is a terrible experience for you and I would expect that the sales as pays a high price. I'm of the opinion that anyone willing to engage in this type of social media bullying might not stop even after being sacked. Long term you might need to involve the police.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    My prob is she went home and gave the opinion I was being a torment and not leaving the staff member in peace


    Not a GDPR breach.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,662 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Not a GDPR breach.

    yes it is.

    the woman went outside her job and told a 3rd party that the OP has made a complaint against a staff member at x pharmacy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,552 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    No no, sorry if I’m not clear.
    I walked into the chemist. Lady approached me, I greeted her with hello and she responded and was really rude to me. I looked at her for a second and she was staring me down. I said, actually I’ll leave it. She replied “okay so” and I walked out. I rang pharmacy and spoke to manager who apologized and said she’d address it with staff member.

    Few days later staff members brothers girlfriend posted it publicly to find another chemist to torment and when I messaged her privately (naming the chemist asking when she became spokeswoman) she screenshot it and shared it on social media. She followed it up with “please leave my in laws alone”

    I wouldn't say that is a GDPR issue in any way, it is however a breach of professional ethics on the part of the Pharmacy, which is likely as big an issue as a GDPR breach would be. If it had involved any details about your reason for being in the chemist - wanting to buy something only available in a chemist - then that probably would make it a GDPR issue. If you had got as far as telling the employee what you were after, then you might be expected to justifiably have a suspicion that the employee might have divulged that to a third party, making it a GDPR issue.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,273 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    the woman went outside her job and told a 3rd party that the OP has made a complaint against a staff member at x pharmacy.

    That's not is in the opening post.

    Opening post does not mention that op made a complaint. Opening post says that the fact that he/she was in the shop. I am finding some of OPs posts a little confusing tbh


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,662 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    That's not is in the opening post.

    Opening post does not mention that op made a complaint. Opening post says that the fact that he/she was in the shop. I am finding some of OPs posts a little confusing tbh

    fair enough but it is in post 14


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Darc19 wrote: »
    Some posters are reading "pharmacy" and not reading the OP.

    The op was not getting any medical requirements and therefore no data was accessed by the sales assistant. It was purely a retail transaction and the assistant knew the op's name from either talking to her or through people they both knew.

    Therefore gdpr simply does not come into the equation.


    Now, if the OP went in with a prescription and the assistant took the details from that data source, it would be a gdpr matter. But they didn't, so gdpr is not breached.

    Rubbish.

    By your rationale, only discussions relating to an illness with your GP would be confidential or subject to GDPR. Complete tosh. The op is a long standing patient at the Pharmacy, and as such has an expectation that what was said, and their name would not be passed on to a third party.

    Pharmacies are covered by the same confidentiality and GDPR regs as other health care providers.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,705 ✭✭✭✭TheDriver


    Was the OPs data shared with a 3rd party? Unknown.
    What is for certain is a confrontation or bahaviour. That's not data, it's unprofessional gossip. Data commissioner wouldn't even look at this but the chemist owner should.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    TheDriver wrote: »
    Was the OPs data shared with a 3rd party? Unknown.
    What is for certain is a confrontation or bahaviour. That's not data, it's unprofessional gossip. Data commissioner wouldn't even look at this but the chemist owner should.

    Yes it is data. Her name was passed on to a third party, and details of the interaction.

    A pharmacy cannot for instance pass your name onto a third party with out your consent for marketing based on your interaction with the pharmacy, why would you think this would be different?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    No no, sorry if I’m not clear.
    I walked into the chemist. Lady approached me, I greeted her with hello and she responded and was really rude to me. I looked at her for a second and she was staring me down. I said, actually I’ll leave it. She replied “okay so” and I walked out. I rang pharmacy and spoke to manager who apologized and said she’d address it with staff member.

    Few days later staff members brothers girlfriend posted it publicly to find another chemist to torment and when I messaged her privately (naming the chemist asking when she became spokeswoman) she screenshot it and shared it on social media. She followed it up with “please leave my in laws alone”

    That makes more sense as to why you feel you have a GDPR concern.
    That the assistant shared the details of the complaint or its circumstance is more serious.

    As your name was shared online in relation to that complaint by a 3rd party an unlawful disclosure may have occured.

    However, I would assume that the liabity for it rests solely with the assistant rather than the pharmacy.
    The pharmacist is unlikely to have disclosed the OPs info to the assistant during whatever complaint handling took place
    It should be a discussion as to what happened and when, rather than the who.

    The assistant then knows "ah, the OP dropped me in it" bitched to her sister and then it took legs.

    The Pharmacy data handling was very likely correct.
    That doesn't excuse the assistant from liability to disciplinary action from her employer or from personal defamation action.

    The pharmacy liability for enforcement via GDPR will end with them ensuring their policy is correct and offering an apology for an errant action by a likely former employee, or confirming training in their GDPR policy should they not be dismissed.


  • Posts: 8,647 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The irony of people tut tutting and saying things like "read up on GDPR before you bandy the term about" etc is delicious.

    As ever the cluelessness around GDPR abounds amongst the amateur enthusiasts.

    This is squarely and 100% a GDPR issue. It just also happens to be problematic for the pharmacy for numerous other reasons such as straightforward patient confidentiality and customer service.

    But it is a GDPR issue too. And a serious one. I'm not surprised the pharmacy owner is taking it seriously because they are potentially in hot water on a number of fronts here.

    I'm a pharmacist. This isn't a GDPR breach. Patient confidentiality, potentially if the person who made the breach has a regulator.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm a pharmacist. This isn't a GDPR breach. Patient confidentiality, potentially if the person who made the breach has a regulator.

    I’m surprised, and concerned by your reply, If a staff member at my clinic divulged info about a patient, including their conduct, it would be a serious issue. . It might be worth googling the case I referred to earlier about a receptionist who discussed patients treatment and behaviour at a party, I am sure you are aware of the case, it was high profile.

    As the pharmacy owner, you are the data controller, and responsible for your staff.


  • Posts: 8,647 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dav010 wrote: »
    I’m surprised, and concerned by your reply, If a staff member at my clinic divulged info about a patient, including their conduct, it would be a serious issue. . It might be worth googling the case I referred to earlier about a receptionist who discussed patients treatment and behaviour at a party, I am sure you are aware of the case, it was high profile.

    As the pharmacy owner, you are the data controller, and responsible for your staff.
    Was patient's medical issues discussed? I don't believe so. How could you prove that the worker in the shop definitely gave the information? Like if it was a shop attendant in spar, would there be this hand wringing occuring?

    If you have concerns about my practice. I will gladly.give you my PSI registration number and you can make an official complaint.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement