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

GDPR -new employer excluding me from communication

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    DaraDali
    Registered Users Posts: 410 ✭✭DaraDali


    Also for him to be excluded from other emails is quite common, I have email lists/google groups etc, I would remove contractors/temp staff or any I class not a full time employee of the company from these groups with the HR approval's from any company wide email's.It's none of their business if they are a contractor there.

    Like the other posters said if the OP is using a work email address he has no reason to even try and complain about GDPR in the workplace sharing his work email/phone with anyone they wish.


  • Options
    #33
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    seamus wrote: »
    ...
    But for general company emails, updates, information, etc, BCC is never used.

    ...

    If one of those emails gets outside, to someones personal account, or any account thats comprised, expect a lot of spam and worse.


  • Options
    #34
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    DaraDali wrote: »
    Also for him to be excluded from other emails is quite common,....

    He's not on lists he should be on, and was previously.


  • Options
    #35
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    seamus wrote: »
    But for general company emails, updates, information, etc, BCC is never used.

    Agree with this.

    We are actually strongly discouraged from using bcc in any situation, as it can go spectacularly wrong. Imagine the situation where the person who is on bcc does not realize it, and replies to all, i.e. to those in the cc and to fields. It's going to become immediately apparent what this person was on bcc and the you are running the chance of the others getting extremely pissed off, etc. OK, you could just bcc everyone I suppose, but then you are receiving a mail which is usually obviously addressing a group, but has just been sent to you, which also smacks of insincerity, and can also cause confusion.

    In general bcc is looked on as sneaky behaviour. The way we handle it is to just forward the original mail to the recipients who you do not want to call out on the original.

    Coming back to point of contractors, I'm also of the opinion that a dedicated work address should be setup for business matters, kept separate from ones private address.


  • Options
    #36
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    Annoyingly annoyed wrote: »
    These are personal emails.

    Well in that case you are completely justified in your reaction, in my book at least.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    skallywag wrote: »
    Agree with this.

    We are actually strongly discouraged from using bcc in any situation, as it can go spectacularly wrong. Imagine the situation where the person who is on bcc does not realize it, and replies to all, i.e. to those in the cc and to fields. It's going to become immediately apparent what this person was on bcc and the you are running the chance of the others getting extremely pissed off, etc. OK, you could just bcc everyone I suppose, but then you are receiving a mail which is usually obviously addressing a group, but has just been sent to you, which also smacks of insincerity, and can also cause confusion.

    In general bcc is looked on as sneaky behaviour. The way we handle it is to just forward the original mail to the recipients who you do not want to call out on the original.

    Coming back to point of contractors, I'm also of the opinion that a dedicated work address should be setup for business matters, kept separate from ones private address.

    I don't think reply all works like that. Also there are valid cases where you don't want people to know everyones email.


  • Options
    #38
    my3cents
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    skallywag wrote: »
    Agree with this.

    We are actually strongly discouraged from using bcc in any situation, as it can go spectacularly wrong. Imagine the situation where the person who is on bcc does not realize it, and replies to all, i.e. to those in the cc and to fields. It's going to become immediately apparent what this person was on bcc and the you are running the chance of the others getting extremely pissed off, etc. OK, you could just bcc everyone I suppose, but then you are receiving a mail which is usually obviously addressing a group, but has just been sent to you, which also smacks of insincerity, and can also cause confusion.

    In general bcc is looked on as sneaky behaviour. The way we handle it is to just forward the original mail to the recipients who you do not want to call out on the original.

    Coming back to point of contractors, I'm also of the opinion that a dedicated work address should be setup for business matters, kept separate from ones private address.

    Once a email with bcc recipients hits a mail server it then treats the emails as being sent to individual recipients so each bcced address gets an email with just the single recipients email address, so no way can you reply to a bcc list as you can only see your email address and no one elses thats the point of bcc.


  • Options
    #39
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    GDPR keeps getting invoked although I’ve yet to see a case brought against major data hoovering companies, never mind small companies who might have not used a bcc for internal email.


  • Options
    #40
    rd1izb7lvpuksx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 260 ✭✭rd1izb7lvpuksx


    my3cents wrote: »
    Once a email with bcc recipients hits a mail server it then treats the emails as being sent to individual recipients so each bcced address gets an email with just the single recipients email address, so no way can you reply to a bcc list as you can only see your email address and no one elses thats the point of bcc.

    In the proposed scenario, Skallywag is talking about an email sent to several people as recipients or CCs and to at least one person as BCC. The ordinary recipients and CCs can see the BCC, but if the BCC replies to all, they'll reply to everyone, and everyone will now know that there were BCC recipients.

    BCCs replying to too many people and side-chain emails with sensitive information being folded back into the full recipient list are two of the most common mess-ups in corporate email.


  • Options
    #41
    scamalert
    Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭scamalert


    Sage Handsome Waiter wrote: »
    In the proposed scenario, Skallywag is talking about an email sent to several people as recipients or CCs and to at least one person as BCC. The ordinary recipients and CCs can see the BCC, but if the BCC replies to all, they'll reply to everyone, and everyone will now know that there were BCC recipients.

    BCCs replying to too many people and side-chain emails with sensitive information being folded back into the full recipient list are two of the most common mess-ups in corporate email.


    yeah its usually same people that you need to tell to switch if off and on as well. Lack of basic pc skills is the issue, that said OP blows a bubble over nothing, unless messed up with using your personal email and getting constant spam, just ask to get new email issued problem solved. This GDPR crap is a bit over the top somehow people just year back survived without it for decades.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    rd1izb7lvpuksx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 260 ✭✭rd1izb7lvpuksx


    scamalert wrote: »
    yeah its usually same people that you need to tell to switch if off and on as well. Lack of basic pc skills is the issue, that said OP blows a bubble over nothing, unless messed up with using your personal email and getting constant spam, just ask to get new email issued problem solved. This GDPR crap is a bit over the top somehow people just year back survived without it for decades.

    Yeah, I don't think the OP has anything to complain about. However, I think GDPR is absolutely necessary, and I hope it's enforced with teeth.

    It takes so little data to uniquely fingerprint a person, and the opportunities for abuse is innumerable.


  • Options
    #43
    my3cents
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    Sage Handsome Waiter wrote: »
    In the proposed scenario, Skallywag is talking about an email sent to several people as recipients or CCs and to at least one person as BCC. The ordinary recipients and CCs can see the BCC, but if the BCC replies to all, they'll reply to everyone, and everyone will now know that there were BCC recipients.

    BCCs replying to too many people and side-chain emails with sensitive information being folded back into the full recipient list are two of the most common mess-ups in corporate email.

    If there are CCed recipients then of course they will get a reply to the reply all. However anyone that was BCCed won't even get a reply.

    All that has happened is that the CCed recipients will know there is at least one BCCed recipient. The don't see the whole BCCed list.

    If a BCCed list is used for all the contractors in the OP's scenario then no one will get a reply other than the sender in the reply all scenario.


  • Options
    #44
    alexmalalex
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 139 ✭✭alexmalalex


    OMM 0000 wrote: »
    Yeah you are.

    This is a complete non-issue.

    If this is bothering you so much to post on boards, I don't understand how you're going to be able to handle real problems in the workplace.

    Have you ever heard of the phrase choose your battles? If you're trying to make everyone in the world follow every rule and process as exact as possible, you're going to have a very stressful life.

    You're being an asshole IMO

    The OP sounds like an experienced professional, not a newbie millennial. It is perfectly valid for the OP not to want to have their email shared with other people. The company is being incompetent and breaching data protection.


  • Options
    #45
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 29,078 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    GDPR keeps getting invoked although I’ve yet to see a case brought against major data hoovering companies, never mind small companies who might have not used a bcc for internal email.


    See Case Study 2


    https://www.dataprotection.ie/sites/default/files/uploads/2018-12/AR2008.pdf


  • Options
    #46
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 29,078 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    seamus wrote: »
    In this case, it's perfectly appropriate (or at least permissible) for a company to "reveal" the details of all recipients of a mail. If the OP doesn't like his personal email address being visible to the rest of his colleagues, then it would be advisable for him to set up a new account for this purpose alone and ask the company to add this to their lists.
    It's not appropriate at all. If the colleagues don't need to see the email address, it shouldn't be revealed to them. Privacy by design.


  • Options
    #47
    rd1izb7lvpuksx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 260 ✭✭rd1izb7lvpuksx


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    It's not appropriate at all. If the colleagues don't need to see the email address, it shouldn't be revealed to them. Privacy by design.

    I build privacy-oriented systems for a living, and you're picking an odd hill to die on. Avoiding group email is not by itself privacy-by-design.


  • Options
    #48
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 29,078 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Sage Handsome Waiter wrote: »
    I build privacy-oriented systems for a living, and you're picking an odd hill to die on. Avoiding group email is not by itself privacy-by-design.


    That's true, by itself it is not privacy by design - but sending a group email to people who don't need to see the email addresses of other recipients is not privacy by design.


  • Options
    #49
    scamalert
    Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭scamalert


    alexmalalex wrote: »
    You're being an asshole IMO

    The OP sounds like an experienced professional, not a newbie millennial. It is perfectly valid for the OP not to want to have their email shared with other people. The company is being incompetent and breaching data protection.


    company should use GDPR breach to fire OP for using colleagues to obtain blocked emails.


    there has to be rules and groups in places also people briefed on company policies to keep confidential data to themselves or only those related, but making exception for every snowflake that their email wouldn't be visible to no one is like asking a boot.


  • Options
    #50
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    See Case Study 2


    https://www.dataprotection.ie/sites/default/files/uploads/2018-12/AR2008.pdf


    Years before GDPR.


  • Options
    #51
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,974 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    OP, register an email account like AnnoyingAnnoyedGuest.atWork@gmail.com and tell work that this is your new email for all work purposes, and ask them to add it to all relevant groups etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    As most whistle blowers find out. We don't deal will with anyone highlighting a problem in Ireland.


  • Options
    #53
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 29,078 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Years before GDPR.

    Indeed - so much time for people to have learnt the basics of data protection - a decade in this case


  • Options
    #54
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    my3cents wrote: »
    All that has happened is that the CCed recipients will know there is at least one BCCed recipient. The don't see the whole BCCed list

    That's exactly my point, the person who was BCC'd is going to be revealed to those on the CC/TO list. This can cause people to get very pissed off, i.e. those in the CC/TO field.


  • Options
    #55
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    beauf wrote: »
    I don't think reply all works like that. Also there are valid cases where you don't want people to know everyones email.

    It does.

    If someone on bcc replies to all, then everyone on the to/cc field will get a message from the person who was on bcc. The others on bcc will not, but those on to/cc will. Hence the person who was hidden gets outed.


  • Options
    #56
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    skallywag wrote: »
    It does.

    If someone on bcc replies to all, then everyone on the to/cc field will get a message from the person who was on bcc. The others on bcc will not, but those on to/cc will. Hence the person who was hidden gets outed.

    You have no idea if the person was bcc or was forwarded the email by someone on the cc list.

    In fact you have no idea if the entire world was not forwarded that email subsequently.

    Getting worked up because someone who is not on the original list replies to it, is truly bizarre.

    You bcc entire list so that no one gets the entire list. I thought that was obvious. Considering this is a GDPR related.

    People play dumb games with email. There is nothing you can do about that.


  • Options
    #57
    my3cents
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    skallywag wrote: »
    That's exactly my point, the person who was BCC'd is going to be revealed to those on the CC/TO list. This can cause people to get very pissed off, i.e. those in the CC/TO field.

    Is that a point worth bothering about? iirc I read a hyped up article about that a while back which didn't make a lot of sense simply because having supported Exchange and then worked with a company that monitored email I never came anyone that complained about it.

    You really need to have far too much time on your hands to be worrying about someone else getting an email and you not knowing about it.

    If thats worth bothering about as a case because it might piss people off then broadcasting a private email address to a distribution list of people that don't need to see it is just as bad.


  • Options
    #58
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    my3cents wrote: »
    Is that a point worth bothering about?

    It can be, and I can give you a good example.

    I recall a time a project manager working with us sent an email to his project team strongly berating them over a certain issue. He put their group manager on bcc. The group manager then replied to all in order to weigh in on it, not knowing that he was bcc'd in the first place. This left the project manager with major egg on his face as he had not wanted the team to know that he had also informed their boss, and to the team it came across that their project manager was a complete snake. They confronted him demanding to know why their boss was not marked in the open on cc, and why he felt the need to hide it via bcc. If, on the other hand, the project manager had forwarded the mail afterwards, then it would have been obvious to the group manager that he had not been copied on the original.

    The main danger of bcc is that the person who is being bcc'd will not always realise it.


  • Options
    #59
    my3cents
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭my3cents


    skallywag wrote: »
    It can be, and I can give you a good example.

    I recall a time a project manager working with us sent an email to his project team strongly berating them over a certain issue. He put their group manager on bcc. The group manager then replied to all in order to weigh in on it, not knowing that he was bcc'd in the first place. This left the project manager with major egg on his face as he had not wanted the team to know that he had also informed their boss, and to the team it came across that their project manager was a complete snake. They confronted him demanding to know why their boss was not marked in the open on cc, and why he felt the need to hide it via bcc. If, on the other hand, the project manager had forwarded the mail afterwards, then it would have been obvious to the group manager that he had not been copied on the original.

    The main danger of bcc is that the person who is being bcc'd will not always realise it.

    But that shouldn't be the case here.

    If everyone on the list was BCCed as I think they should be then there would be no such issue.

    There are good reasons for CCing when you want a group to get the same set of instructions/information and to let everyone in the group know that.

    In the OP's case why does he need to know anything about other contractors on site that work for the same agency? They aren't doing the same job by the sound of it and are only a group as far as the agency are concerned.


  • Options
    #60
    skallywag
    Registered Users Posts: 3,000 ✭✭✭skallywag


    my3cents wrote: »
    But that shouldn't be the case here.

    If everyone on the list was BCCed as I think they should be then there would be no such issue.

    It was a project manager addressing the complete project team, are you seriously suggesting he should have bcc'd everyone? It would then have looked like the issue was with one individual rather than shared across the team ...

    In the OP's case I agree with you. My point is relating to your statement that it should not be a point worth bothering about if someone is bcc'd without the knowledge of those on the cc/to fields.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    skallywag wrote: »
    It can be, and I can give you a good example.

    I recall a time a project manager working with us sent an email to his project team strongly berating them over a certain issue. He put their group manager on bcc. The group manager then replied to all in order to weigh in on it, not knowing that he was bcc'd in the first place. This left the project manager with major egg on his face as he had not wanted the team to know that he had also informed their boss, and to the team it came across that their project manager was a complete snake. They confronted him demanding to know why their boss was not marked in the open on cc, and why he felt the need to hide it via bcc. If, on the other hand, the project manager had forwarded the mail afterwards, then it would have been obvious to the group manager that he had not been copied on the original.

    The main danger of bcc is that the person who is being bcc'd will not always realise it.

    The issue there is a team thats so dumb they don't realise everything gets reported upwards anyway, and they they don't need to be told that explicitly.

    Very childish group.


Advertisement