Employment Tribunal and SAR

[Ra9jd]

So I was recently put through an investigation at work (a very large company) for breaching GDPR (which on my opinion the breach is a grey area), and possibly putting the company in a bad light. I didn’t think the incident was worthy of a dismissal, but that’s what the decision was. I appealed, which was rejected and I generally feel the whole incident wasn’t looked at, but just the actual action involving the ‘breaches’.
Anyway - I will be taking this to an employment tribunal, and in prep for that, as well as other issues I am trying to resolve, I have requested a SAR. They did not respond within the month, so I sent out a 7 day ‘warning’ to which they have replied (on day 6) asking for ID (which I understand) but also which employee’s emails I would like them to search and then they will contact the account holder advising them that their email account will be searched and the dates and reason they search will be for. Is this normal/allowed? Had I been in their position and had emails that I wanted to not be found from the SAR, I would delete them before the SAR is conducted (which I know is not allowed) - but also is there a way of knowing if emails have been removed?

Many thanks in advance

 

[Stas Lawicki]

You'll never know. You may have redress via an order if you can prove information is being withheld that has any material impact on the process, but this is unlikely.

What are you hoping to get from this company? A pay out? Your old job back?

ETs are not a pleasant place and take time and energy to fight. If you're not looking to go back nor after any money, I wouldn't bother. Life is too short for this nonsense.

Oh, and you'll probably get a data dump of 1000s of pages of emails etc.

Speak to an employment lawyer before you submit your ET1 and ask for their honest appraisal of success prior to engaging.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Eh? Bit of a negative reply there... telling him not to bother with an Employment Tribunal don't you think?... Why would you do that? If he feels that he has been treated unfairly, he has every right to defend himself and go to a Tribunal.

I went through an Employment Tribunal, about 12 years ago, I was working my backside off for a large (worldwide) distribution company... I had an accident during working hours, caused by an issue created by the Management (carpet tiles put onto a wet carpet tiled floor at the bottom of some stairs to try and dry out the already wet carpet tiles )... I slipped on them smashing my back onto the stairs, damaged my back and was off work for 6 weeks, had physiotherapy through the company, they then tried to say it was my fault for slipping on the wet carpet tiles?!...

Anyways, they tried to make me redundant during being off sick, I contacted the union asked if they could do that and they fought my corner... Because I'd gone down the route of a claim with the union, they decided I wasn't fit for the company, and removed my position there... then employed two people to do my job... which was funny... but anyways, I got a £4000+ payout and there was jack they could do about it...

I was only there for 13 months...

 

[Stas Lawicki]

On the contrary, I think it's rather positive! Key information is missing like his length of service and his record. He might not have a case at all!

I'm all for sticking to a company when they are at fault, but the process involved (seems you and I have both taken companies to an ET and won) is stressful, time consuming and sometimes completely fruitless. On the thin info we have, I wouldn't even consider an ET unless there was a whole load of additional info that we don't know about which would make it remotely viable.

There's no impact on my life, so the OP can fill their boots... Chase what could be a hollow endeavor or crack on with something more productive. I got a considerable pay out for my ET, but even if it was doubled or even tripled, I wouldn't go through it again.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

I didn't find it stressful at all, nor time consuming... in fact, I found it quite amusing that a multi-million pound company or it's Management could even consider going to a Tribunal on such an open and shut case ... I guess we had two totally different cases.

For this chaps case however again, assuming it's completely different to yours, it may not be as time consuming as yours either...

 

[Stas Lawicki]

I guess your pain was the bad back...!

Yeah, maybe they relish the idea - at least now they have two different opinions and experiences that may or may not help them.

 

[Ra9jd]

Many thanks for the responses. I think it's important to see both the negative and positive sides of this as everything is not always nice and easy.

So, I was with the company for 2.5 years (1.5 years full time, 1 year part time), it was a good additional income, and I was planning to use it for a mortgage application as well as having the flexibility of working overtime if needed to earn extra cash. I also had some good perks which I made use of a lot.

I also had a salary increase which was not reflected in my pay, and I also had holiday days carried over from the previous year which they did not pay me for.

In essence, I would like the job back, and the money I believe they owe me which is definately between £1-3k.

The data requested is to see if there has been any conversation about me related to dismissing me without regarding the investigation notes, and to find out how many days holiday were moved forward.

One of the things I was concerned about is that are they allowed to restrict the accounts requested and can they inform them the search will take place giving them the opportunity to remove such data.

 

[Recruitment&HR]

Have you submitted your claim to ACAS Early Conciliation? This is mandatory prior to being able to make an ET claim.

You should really do this now as the cutoff is 3 months less one day and whilst they deal with your DSAR they will also receive notification from ACAS which may well trigger an attempt to settle this matter as they will see that you're being serious.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Th real question is, what was so grey about the GDPR breach.

 

[Recruitment&HR]

Many thanks for the responses. I think it's important to see both the negative and positive sides of this as everything is not always nice and easy.

So, I was with the company for 2.5 years (1.5 years full time, 1 year part time), it was a good additional income, and I was planning to use it for a mortgage application as well as having the flexibility of working overtime if needed to earn extra cash. I also had some good perks which I made use of a lot.

I also had a salary increase which was not reflected in my pay, and I also had holiday days carried over from the previous year which they did not pay me for.

In essence, I would like the job back, and the money I believe they owe me which is definately between £1-3k.

The data requested is to see if there has been any conversation about me related to dismissing me without regarding the investigation notes, and to find out how many days holiday were moved forward.

One of the things I was concerned about is that are they allowed to restrict the accounts requested and can they inform them the search will take place giving them the opportunity to remove such data.

The only accounts they are entitled to restrict are those which count as privileged (e.g. lawyers). So you should ask for all e-mails which include your name or employee ID that have been sent or received by the following accounts (i.e. people from HR, management, team colleagues - you have to list the individual names or shared accounts).

 

[Mr D]

Many thanks for the responses. I think it's important to see both the negative and positive sides of this as everything is not always nice and easy.

So, I was with the company for 2.5 years (1.5 years full time, 1 year part time), it was a good additional income, and I was planning to use it for a mortgage application as well as having the flexibility of working overtime if needed to earn extra cash. I also had some good perks which I made use of a lot.

I also had a salary increase which was not reflected in my pay, and I also had holiday days carried over from the previous year which they did not pay me for.

In essence, I would like the job back, and the money I believe they owe me which is definately between £1-3k.

The data requested is to see if there has been any conversation about me related to dismissing me without regarding the investigation notes, and to find out how many days holiday were moved forward.

One of the things I was concerned about is that are they allowed to restrict the accounts requested and can they inform them the search will take place giving them the opportunity to remove such data.

Getting job back?
Not sure that is a good idea - don't think I've heard of anyone getting job back as a result of ET. Not saying its impossible - but would you want to work there again after all this even?

 

[Ra9jd]

I have submitted to ACAS, who did not receive any response from the company and have given me an EC Certificate.

I would be happy to return to work for the company for the benefits outlined above (perks, extra salary and flexibility). Its such a large company, I would not really see any of the managers involved.

So regarding the request, I should ask for the managers emails who were involved with the investigation?
Is it normal practice for them to inform account holders? Like I said previously, they'd just delete said data and I'd have no proof if it was a predetermined dismissal

Regarding the grey data breach - a customer offered her contact details, to which I rejected and said it can be retrieved from the system, with no objection from the customer. But a complaint from the customer (which I have not seen) lead them to investigate the 'data breach'. Is it to OK to put more specific details on a public forum?

 

[Recruitment&HR]

Ok great re ACAS EC. Shocking that they didn't bother to respond.

Were you supplied with the full investigation report (you should have been, less redactions of course where witnesses don't want to be identified). If so then I'm not sure if aiming the DSAR at the managers doing the investigation is of much use but it also doesn't hurt.

I would request the entire contents of your employee file, any e-mails where you are named or otherwise identified between anyone involved in the disciplinary process, HR in general, your line manager (their line manager). You have to name those people.

Restrict the request to the period starting 2-3 weeks prior to the alleged breach until now.

It may throw up something, it may not.

Good luck.

Oh, and stick with the tribunal threat. It's free, you don't need a solicitor and most employers will try to settle before the main hearing. However, cost orders can be made, so if your case is hopeless (I can't judge that from the info here, and I wouldn't where someone is not a client) there is a risk that you may be ordered to pay their costs. But you can always withdraw a few weeks before the hearing to avoid that. For now I'd keep going because at the very least you will receive a copy of their ET3 and grounds of resistance after which you will be in a better situation to judge the merits of you case.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Regarding the grey data breach - a customer offered her contact details, to which I rejected and said it can be retrieved from the system, with no objection from the customer. But a complaint from the customer (which I have not seen) lead them to investigate the 'data breach'. Is it to OK to put more specific details on a public forum?

I don't get it...

how is this your issue if the company has stored her details?

There is no data breach at all on your behalf?

 

[Newchodge]

I don't get it...

how is this your issue if the company has stored her details?

There is no data breach at all on your behalf?

Accessing the client's contact details without consent?

 

[Ra9jd]

Apologies, so the customer in question was being provocative and offered her number which I refused (and being polite, said it can be obtained from the system), which the customer showed no objection. The details were taken and the customer was contacted. The investigation was for an alleged breach of gdpr, harassment, giving the company a bad name, The argument from my side is that it was the customer's data and not the companies, permission was given to take it and contact. It wasn't harassment as the customer invited contact initially, and the response showed no sign of 'discomfort' in fact, it was a positive response.
The conversation was about 10 messages from me and perhaps 5 from the customer. With the only sign of discomfort bring the customer mentioning their marital status.
Giving the bad name - the customer supposedly made a post on social media, which was only mentioned to me at the decision hearing, and I still have not seen it. It is the root of the whole investigation so feel it is important.

I have not been given a report as such, but have been given the majority of the evidence, minus the social media post, part of the preliminary investigation was not in the minutes, (I have no evidence of this) and I had not received the minutes from the appeal hearing (even though it has been requested).

I also feel that the company may be using me as an example seeing as they have been mentioned in the press rather heavily regarding gdpr and customer data.

 

[Newchodge]

the customer in question was being provocative

Is it not your role to deal with the customer professionally?

 

[Ra9jd]

I did deal with the customer professionally, but contacted later. And the contact was not anything provocative. Well, it wasn't intended in that way.
However it seems as if the investigation was done with view that everything I did was with an ill intention, and whatever the customer did is looked at from positive views. When attempting to use other staff members who the customer saw after as witnesses to her behaviour, the company refused, saying that they weren't witness to my interaction with her. However I feel that having a view on what her behaviour was like would show that she was being provocative herself, and that she offered her number.

 

[Newchodge]

did deal with the customer professionally, but contacted later.

You mean that you dealt with a customer and then, later, contacted that customer on a personal basis?

 

[Ra9jd]

Contacted her related to the job, but not something within my role, it was me trying to go out my way for someone in that situation. Offered to meet up, which wasn't intended to be anything 'provocative' but she thought it was and said she's married.
The dismissal was around breaching gdpr, and actions which caused damage to the companys name. My argument is that she offered her number, and didn't object to me taking it from the system. When contacted, her response was positive.

 

[Newchodge]

Contacted her related to the job, but not something within my role, it was me trying to go out my way for someone in that situation. Offered to meet up, which wasn't intended to be anything 'provocative' but she thought it was and said she's married.
The dismissal was around breaching gdpr, and actions which caused damage to the companys name. My argument is that she offered her number, and didn't object to me taking it from the system. When contacted, her response was positive.

You are really joking aren't you. You ciontacted a customer personally? Are you completely mad? A strange man offering to meet up a customer SCREAMS pervert to me. You are lucky you just got sacked.

 

[Ra9jd]

Well, depends on the line of work.... And the interaction that was had during the transaction. But like I said, the customer was provocative, the details of which I will not go through here, and offered her number. So technically it was her who 'lead me on'. I've customers in the past, going out my way to assist them including male customers, customers with families and newborn children, etc. Some have explicitly asked me to contact them with other information. The fact that this customer was provocative had nothing to do with it. The personal contact was to help with her situation. I didn't go straight in and just contact to meet.

 

[Newchodge]

The personal contact was to help with her situation. I didn't go straight in and just contact to meet.

You really don't understand, do you. You have absoilutely no chance of winning your tribunal. You are in a professional relationship with a client and you try to hit on her and then blame her for being provocative??? Are you completely mad or just a pervert?

 

[Ra9jd]

None, I did not hit on her. If I ask a male to meet up it's fine, but I ask a female and I'm hitting on her? That's the problem. And just because the customer made the wrong assumption, the investigators without investigating fully have made a decision. I believe there's many aspects they have not considered but obviously you guys are the experts with things like this
There is still the unpaid money too.

 

[Newchodge]

None, I did not hit on her. If I ask a male to meet up it's fine, but I ask a female and I'm hitting on her? That's the problem. And just because the customer made the wrong assumption, the investigators without investigating fully have made a decision. I believe there's many aspects they have not considered but obviously you guys are the experts with things like this
There is still the unpaid money too.

Does your professional role require that you hold a personal meeting with a client? To discuss what, professionally?

 

[Mr D]

Contacted her related to the job, but not something within my role, it was me trying to go out my way for someone in that situation. Offered to meet up, which wasn't intended to be anything 'provocative' but she thought it was and said she's married.
The dismissal was around breaching gdpr, and actions which caused damage to the companys name. My argument is that she offered her number, and didn't object to me taking it from the system. When contacted, her response was positive.

Offered to meet up? That alone sounds bad.

 

[Mr D]

None, I did not hit on her. If I ask a male to meet up it's fine, but I ask a female and I'm hitting on her? That's the problem. And just because the customer made the wrong assumption, the investigators without investigating fully have made a decision. I believe there's many aspects they have not considered but obviously you guys are the experts with things like this
There is still the unpaid money too.

Just from your posts it comes across badly. Investigation presumably started with a complaint - assumption or not there was action by you.
To prevent any future problems the company got rid.

Cannot see how they could have you back. In any role.

 

[Stas Lawicki]

What say @Root 66 Woodshop - you still for this ET....?!

 

[Ra9jd]

Well, the company owes me money too.
I don't want to give away too much information, but like I have said above, I've only mention what they've actually investigated. She was provocative first, and without knowing the full story, I'd appreciate if names or labels weren't thrown.
I do not believe that trust between myself and the company has been lost completely - and if they felt, I could work in a non customer facing role. However in the 2.5 years, customers gave positive feedback on my service and at times have also mentioned how I've gone out my way for them. This was no different. In fact even other female colleagues who dealt with the customer in question mentioned at the time how 'out there' she was.

 

[Newchodge]

Well, the company owes me money too.
I don't want to give away too much information, but like I have said above, I've only mention what they've actually investigated. She was provocative first, and without knowing the full story, I'd appreciate if names or labels weren't thrown.
I do not believe that trust between myself and the company has been lost completely - and if they felt, I could work in a non customer facing role. However in the 2.5 years, customers gave positive feedback on my service and at times have also mentioned how I've gone out my way for them. This was no different. In fact even other female colleagues who dealt with the customer in question mentioned at the time how 'out there' she was.

You still do not understand. The customer may be provocative, may be 'out there' mat even invite you to their home for an orgy. None of that matters at all. Your job is to deal with the issue that the customer has raised with you in a professional manner. Doing anything else is stupid and not in the interests of your employer.

 

[Stas Lawicki]

Unfortunately, the implied mutual trust and confidence is clearly lost - certainly from the employer's side. You've no doubt broken a number if different protocols and the company have moved to deal with it.

I draw your attention back to my orignal post. If it were me, I would move on. Just consider the time and energy to fight this (forget the moral argument for a moment). If the likely outcome is you lose, then where do you go from there?

Are you better off putting your energy into finding a new role?

You might have a claim for the unpaid wages (not sure as I don't have any real info), but if this were me, I'd go and have a chat with my boss and aim to reach an agreement - get your monies and agree a reference, walk away.

This might have all been a genuine mistake on your part and that is unfortunate, but try not to compound it all by fighting for something that will cost more on your time and effort than you might get back.

 

[Mr D]

Well, the company owes me money too.
I don't want to give away too much information, but like I have said above, I've only mention what they've actually investigated. She was provocative first, and without knowing the full story, I'd appreciate if names or labels weren't thrown.
I do not believe that trust between myself and the company has been lost completely - and if they felt, I could work in a non customer facing role. However in the 2.5 years, customers gave positive feedback on my service and at times have also mentioned how I've gone out my way for them. This was no different. In fact even other female colleagues who dealt with the customer in question mentioned at the time how 'out there' she was.

It sounds like the company made its own mind up about the trust issue. And they disagree with you on that.

 

[Ra9jd]

Thanks for the advice all.
The company is a huge company, and within my 2.5 years there, had 3 managers and I only really had a conversation with my first one. For issues you have so many departments to go to, and where I have tried to get my salary ocrrected 3 times (twice whilst working there and once straight after dismissal). This was a part time job and I was there for the extra salary and the benefits, and getting another part time job in the industry would be difficult with the training that comes with it.
I'll probably try to claim the salary back from the relevant dept. And take it from there. But I appreciate everyone's views on this and advice.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

What say @Root 66 Woodshop - you still for this ET....?!

Quite amusing actually...

It's like eldorado!

@Ra9jd - Give up, walk away... not worth it... you've made yourself look a bit of a tool... accept that you've made a mistake and leave it TBH.