Employer broke my confidence

runawaybishop

Calahonda52 wrote: »

OP: whats the real issue with people knowing, is it an Irish thing?

People knowing means people can be there to support you, and a small minority may not.

I have had a recurrence of cancer, not clear yet if my celestial boarding pass is ready to print, but I have told everyone who needs to know.

I am also working on living life to the full and taking whatever treatment makes sense.

Live your life, get well, and let those who don't support you, including the village gossip, (whatever that entails) go and f**k themselves.
If you haven't done so already, do 30 minutes mindfulness or similar every day and clear your head of all this muck.

Get well, keep well and good luck

I'd say the real issue is the OP wants to choose when and who they share the information with, that choice was taken out of their hands and it's a massive breach of trust.

It's not an Irish thing, it's basic dignity

MoonUnit75

Calahonda52 wrote: »

OP: whats the real issue with people knowing, is it an Irish thing?

People knowing means people can be there to support you, and a small minority may not.

I have had a recurrence of cancer, not clear yet if my celestial boarding pass is ready to print, but I have told everyone who needs to know.

I am also working on living life to the full and taking whatever treatment makes sense.

Live your life, get well, and let those who don't support you, including the village gossip, (whatever that entails) go and f**k themselves.
If you haven't done so already, do 30 minutes mindfulness or similar every day and clear your head of all this muck.

Get well, keep well and good luck

I'm sure any of us who has suffered health problems find comfort in having some kind of 'normal' life away from talk of illness and sympathy. Just interacting with people in the local shop in the normal way can help keep you sane, instead of people coming up constantly saying 'oh god I heard the news, shockin terrible news, how are ye' or ducking into a different aisle in Tesco to avoid having these awkward conversations.

The boss in this business had no valid reason or excuse to disclose this information and I can totally get why the OP is distressed by it.

screamer

I would say boss has no right whatsoever to divulge personal information to your colleagues, and has been very unprofessional. Employers have no right to know anything about an illness, even if medical reports are requested, all they can be told is whether you are fit for work or not, and what additional supports if any you may require to carry out your duties.
I don’t know what you can do op, legal route yes of course, but what ramifications may that have? If you’re off sick a long time might they try terminate your employment? At the same time, this is outrageous and no way a boss should have to be told something is confidential. I feel sorry for you, it’s a horrible thing to do when you’re ill also.

martingriff

Calahonda52 wrote: »

OP: whats the real issue with people knowing, is it an Irish thing?

People knowing means people can be there to support you, and a small minority may not.

I have had a recurrence of cancer, not clear yet if my celestial boarding pass is ready to print, but I have told everyone who needs to know.

I am also working on living life to the full and taking whatever treatment makes sense.

Live your life, get well, and let those who don't support you, including the village gossip, (whatever that entails) go and f**k themselves.
If you haven't done so already, do 30 minutes mindfulness or similar every day and clear your head of all this muck.

Get well, keep well and good luck

The real issue here is they had a private matter they want to be kept private and not told to people. It is nobody's business. Why does there have to be a "real" issue here

I can assure you it is not just an Irish thing to want to keep something private until the person lets people know

Calahonda52

martingriff wrote: »

The real issue here is they had a private matter they want to be kept private and not told to people. It is nobody's business. Why does there have to be a "real" issue here

I can assure you it is not just an Irish thing to want to keep something private until the person lets people know

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

buttercups88

buttercups88 wrote: »

I am so upset of this, I really thought I could confide in her. Especially as when I was talking to her I had said I hadn't told many people yet outside immediate family and one or two friends. One of the people she told is the town gossip and I know she will blab to everyone and anyone.

When i confronted my employer she was very unapologetic and said that she needed to let them know that I would be needing time off and when they asked why she told them.

I've no idea if I can continue working there after such a breach of trust. But I don't think I could go through job hunting process at the moment.

The two things in bold are what would get me the most.

If she presented me with an "unapologetic" attitude after breaching my privacy I'd be taking this a lot further with HER manager, or the owner, whichever applies. NO WAY in hell I would let this go.

Work colleagues have NO right to know why someone is off work, and the cheek of them to even ask (that's if the manager was truthful about that, which I doubt).

hesaidshesaid

DancingDaisy1 wrote: »

I'm sorry to hear of your unprofessional boss!

I had something similar happen to me recently.

I am a teacher and at 6 weeks pregnant, I had to tell my principal that I was pregnant to be allowed to work remotely due to Covid. In normal times, there is not a hope in hell that I would have told her so early.

On the day that I had found out I had a miscarriage, she called me to say that she had blurted my pregnancy out to other staff members and the whole staff found out from there.

It made the healing process a lot harder when I knew other people knew my private business.

Just wondering what code of conduct did Big Gob (principal) breach here?

I would like to take this issue further as she is not a confidential person and so unprofessional in so many ways.

Hi there, just wanted to say very sorry to hear of your miscarriage, it’s a heartbreaking time.

Your principal should of course know better but unfortunately the reality is that so many bosses don’t. My advice to you is to focus on yourself and your own healing for now. F@ck her. She doesn’t deserve your energy and is probably unchangeable anyway. Maybe just think about whether you want to stay working there long term.

AndrewJRenko

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

Keeping your own medical information private is not 'secret culture'. It is just keeping your own medical information private, no more and no less. It won't 'come out eventually' if you continue to keep your own medical information private. No-one else has any need to know.

Dav010

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

The examples of people staying silent you give above are not remotely related to the sharing of private medical information. And, there is no reason for that medical information to be shared eventually unless the person consents to it being shared. The op had a reasonable expectation that the information given to her boss was confidential and not to be shared, by sharing it, the employer broke that confidentiality. This is completely unacceptable.

I’m wondering are you residing under a rock, the leaking of medical information is kinda topical at the moment.

martingriff

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

WTF we all have to be open now because we might enable paedoes or beatings my GOD do you actually think before you write.

Yes it may eventually come out or if it clears up it may not but what you are not getting is ITS THE PERSONS CHOICE WHEN AND IF THEY WANT TO RELEASE STUFF

What else should we be sharing to all the world so we can never let the above happen. How much you spend on stuff, our bank balance. Maybe we need a slot every week for people to tell everyone everything so we don't have a private culture

hurleronditch

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

No it won’t.

A few years ago I took multiple days off on compassionate grounds for a personal matter. I didn’t tell my boss, and no one outside of my immediate family knows what happened.

My boss trusted me, and knew that if it was significant enough for me to ask for time off at zero notice it wasn’t trivial. He never asked and I never told.

That’s good management, and a good employee/manager relationship.

MoonUnit75

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

All of your examples of ‘secret culture’ are matters of major public interest related to the behaviour of state and church institutions. No one has a legitimate interest in the private health matters of a co-worker unless that person decides to share it themselves. The employer is either completely thick and shouldn’t be running a business or chose to share the information to deliberately undermine a worker with an illness.

...Ghost...

runawaybishop wrote: »

How so? Gdpr specifically deals with data, which is information that is stored in a system. If you tell me something verbally and I repeat it then that is not data.

GDPR covers more than data stored in a system. I took GDPR compliance training a couple of years ago. We were forbidden from putting any information on paper which could identify a customer. You could write a first name, or a surname, or a phone number, or a street address (without the house number). It was not allowed to put any two pieces of information together as it could identify the customer.

This extended to verbally passing data, whether written down or not. Only the customer was permitted to identify themselves in person or over the phone and under strict GDPR protocols.

Data breaches can and do occur without the data having ever been written down by the data controller.

Here's an easy to digest version of GDPR and what data is.

Mrs OBumble

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Put the boot on the other foot here, or walk in the Ops shoes before penning such stuff.
Another one for the ignore list

I have.

I was very, very grateful for the colleagues who made sure I didn't have to lift anything for several months, and who agreed that our "standups" could be sit-downs when I found them too tiring.

They were only able to assist because they were given some information about what was going on: Because of this, they knew that I wasn't just being lazy, manipulative, etc.

Strumms

Mike Murdock wrote: »

It just shows that there are a lot of people managers out there who should not be let anywhere near managing people. At all.

It’s true unfortunately, there seems to be quite a dearth of talent and abilities in management spheres in this country...

I’ve known a few who I wouldn’t have trusted to manage their dinner without supervision let alone international organizations and talented people.

The decision making of the manager being discussed is so rank poor and amateurish that it’s frightening .

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I have.

I was very, very grateful for the colleagues who made sure I didn't have to lift anything for several months, and who agreed that our "standups" could be sit-downs when I found them too tiring.

They were only able to assist because they were given some information about what was going on: Because of this, they knew that I wasn't just being lazy, manipulative, etc.

So your automatic "go to" if someone is missing from work is to assume they are being "a lazy bint" (your words) or manipulative?

Just like you don't trust anyone working from home, to actually be working, right?

In this case, the OPs manager had NO RIGHT to divulge their personal and private information. And their colleagues had no right to expect to be told anything about it.

Calahonda52

Calahonda52 wrote: »

Why?
Whats the big deal, it will come out eventually: its the secret culture that enabled church paedos, industrial schools, Tuam babies etc
I agree the ER breached trust

Why in the name of Christ would you assume that it would come out eventually?

Why in the name of Christ are you equating someone not wanting to disclose their nedical issues with church abuse?

Calahonda52 wrote: »

OP: whats the real issue with people knowing, is it an Irish thing?............. but I have told everyone who needs to know.

Why didn't you tell everyone who didn't need to know? What's the real issue with those people knowing?...........Is it an Irish thing?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Because of this, they knew that I wasn't just being lazy, manipulative, etc.

That's the third or fourth time you've implied the above.......are you really so mistrusting of people unless they have a "valid" reason? It looks like you are projecting your own paranoid fears and misgivings and it doesn't paint you in a very positive light, I have to say. Like the supervisors in work who are itching for everyone to get back into the office so that they can be watched over, make sure they're not slacking off.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

So your automatic "go to" if someone is missing from work is to assume they are being "a lazy bint" (your words) or manipulative?

Just like you don't trust anyone working from home, to actually be working, right?

SNAP!

Mike Murdock

Strumms wrote: »

It’s true unfortunately, there seems to be quite a dearth of talent and abilities in management spheres in this country...

I’ve known a few who I wouldn’t have trusted to manage their dinner without supervision let alone international organizations and talented people.

The decision making of the manager being discussed is so rank poor and amateurish that it’s frightening .

It does not help that companies rarely, if ever, pay for decent people management training. It's usually some bull**** cobbled together by HR, done on the cheap (or free), that teaches you nothing about Mentoring or Managing people.

The HR & Org mantra now is - "Learn on the Job"

That may work for technical or functional skills, but people management is a whole different ball game.

...Ghost...

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I have.

I was very, very grateful for the colleagues who made sure I didn't have to lift anything for several months, and who agreed that our "standups" could be sit-downs when I found them too tiring.

They were only able to assist because they were given some information about what was going on: Because of this, they knew that I wasn't just being lazy, manipulative, etc.

I find it sad that you feel it is necessary for work colleagues to know eachothers medical issues in order to prevent thoughts, or accusations of laziness and manipulation.

If you want to share your medical and personal details with colleagues, that's your choice, but there is no need for this to happen. If they are not told and they jump on the wagon of thinking you are lazy or manipulative, then they really wouldn't be the type of people you should want knowing your business anyway. Everyone is entitled to their medical privacy. A Doctor isn't even allowed discuss medical details with a the spouse of patient without permission and yet the OP had their private medical information spread around the office when the boss knew the OP was keeping it within her close circle of family and friends.

The OP may feel too uncomfortable to return to work after this breach of trust and if so, she really should bring a constructive dismissal case against the employer for the wrongdoing. If she can return to work, the boss needs to to be made to recognise what she has done and make reparations for it.

Strumms

Mike Murdock wrote: »

It does not help that companies rarely, if ever, pay for decent people management training. It's usually some bull**** cobbled together by HR, done on the cheap (or free), that teaches you nothing about Mentoring or Managing people.

The HR & Org mantra now is - "Learn on the Job"

That may work for technical or functional skills, but people management is a whole different ball game.

HR aka the department of management support and damage limitation should have no input into career development, training etc ... they are never any use at it because they only understand the jobs from one point of view, the management point of view..they never enable developments.

Pilots, nurses, physiotherapists, forklift drivers, and thousands of more jobs simply can’t do on the job training until you qualify and demonstrate a suitable standard of competency whereby it’s suitable and safe..

Mrs OBumble

Deleted User wrote: »

So your automatic "go to" if someone is missing from work is to assume they are being "a lazy bint" (your words) or manipulative?

Another reading comprehension issue. I'll try again.

If a colleague was away with no explanation, came back refused to do any of the lifting which is part of the job, asked to sit during stand-up meetings, and would not give any reason even broad terms - then yes, I would look at them badly, and I would refuse to cover parts of their tasks.

Whereas a simple "I've had surgery, and been told not to lift anything heavier than a 2L bottle of milk for six weeks)" - and I'll fall over myself to make thing easier for them.

Deleted User wrote: »

In this case, the OPs manager had NO RIGHT to divulge their personal and private information. And their colleagues had no right to expect to be told anything about it.

As stated a number of times, the OP's manager was very wrong.

But equally, colleagues do deserve a general explanation. Lightening the workload of some, at the expense of others for no good reason is bullying. They don't need the diagnosis / details, but they do deserve the courtesy of some explanation.

And if you think a temp is going to be bought in to cover the workload of a weekly or monthly hospital visit - you're dreaming.

martingriff

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Another reading comprehension issue. I'll try again.

If a colleague was away with no explanation, came back refused to do any of the lifting which is part of the job, asked to sit during stand-up meetings, and would not give any reason even broad terms - then yes, I would look at them badly, and I would refuse to cover parts of their tasks.

Whereas a simple "I've had surgery, and been told not to lift anything heavier than a 2L bottle of milk for six weeks)" - and I'll fall over myself to make thing easier for them.






As stated a number of times, the OP's manager was very wrong.

But equally, colleagues do deserve a general explanation. Lightening the workload of some, at the expense of others for no good reason is bullying. They don't need the diagnosis / details, but they do deserve the courtesy of some explanation.

And if you think a temp is going to be bought in to cover the workload of a weekly or monthly hospital visit - you're dreaming.

All they need to know is the person is out is "asking a man about a dog". All you keep saying is the manager was wrong BUT. There is no but. It's called personal for a reason its personal you or anyone has no right to know.

I see you have gone from they need to know why to a "general explanation"

AndrewJRenko

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Another reading comprehension issue. I'll try again.

If a colleague was away with no explanation, came back refused to do any of the lifting which is part of the job, asked to sit during stand-up meetings, and would not give any reason even broad terms - then yes, I would look at them badly, and I would refuse to cover parts of their tasks.

'Asked to sit'? You're heading for the WRC at speed if you run stand-up meetings where someone needs to ask permission to sit. Not everyone can stand for extended periods, and no employer should be assuming that this works for everyone. And they don't need to explain why either.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Whereas a simple "I've had surgery, and been told not to lift anything heavier than a 2L bottle of milk for six weeks)" - and I'll fall over myself to make thing easier for them.

No employee needs to give details of their medical history or their functional abilities to their peers. That is between them and their line manager.

Let's say the need for personal time is down to incontinence from whatever cause. Are you seriously suggesting that the employee or employer needs to explain to their peers that the employee needs time to clean themselves up and change their sanitary wear a few times each day?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

As stated a number of times, the OP's manager was very wrong.

But equally, colleagues do deserve a general explanation. Lightening the workload of some, at the expense of others for no good reason is bullying. They don't need the diagnosis / details, but they do deserve the courtesy of some explanation.

And if you think a temp is going to be bought in to cover the workload of a weekly or monthly hospital visit - you're dreaming.

Managing workload is managing, not bullying. Employees don't need an explanation.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Another reading comprehension issue. I'll try again.

If a colleague was away with no explanation, came back refused to do any of the lifting which is part of the job, asked to sit during stand-up meetings, and would not give any reason even broad terms - then yes, I would look at them badly, and I would refuse to cover parts of their tasks.

Whereas a simple "I've had surgery, and been told not to lift anything heavier than a 2L bottle of milk for six weeks)" - and I'll fall over myself to make thing easier for them.






As stated a number of times, the OP's manager was very wrong.

But equally, colleagues do deserve a general explanation. Lightening the workload of some, at the expense of others for no good reason is bullying. They don't need the diagnosis / details, but they do deserve the courtesy of some explanation.

And if you think a temp is going to be bought in to cover the workload of a weekly or monthly hospital visit - you're dreaming.

No, there is no comprehension issue here, and now you're going down the avenue of presenting scenarios in an attempt to back up the position you took.

And frankly, in the scenario you presented if you did behave that way, it only reflects badly on you. So much for the workplace loyalty and team spirit you're always harping on about on various threads, huh?

Most people these days would have enough intuition / basic cop on to realise if a colleague was missing for appointments or out for a while and came back requiring some accomodations, that there was an issue without it having to be explained to them.

If they have an issue about the delegation of workload, by all means, take it up with the manager. Delegation of workloads in the event of an employee having difficulties of any sort (medical, personal, or otherwise) is a manager's problem to resolve but it does not and should never involve divulging sensitive or confidential information on one employee's circumstances to another. End of.

If someone is managing staff, and can't manage to deal with employee confidentiality without the discretion required, or capable of answering nosy colleagues with a simple "that's confidential" when necessary, then that person really should not be in a position where they are managing staff.

Idleater

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

'Asked to sit'? You're heading for the WRC at speed if you run stand-up meetings where someone needs to ask permission to sit. Not everyone can stand for extended periods, and no employer should be assuming that this works for everyone. And they don't need to explain why either.

Not only that, but even in scrum (where the term is daily scrum) it doesn't state you must stand. It was thought up to encourage rapid participation. Teams of course decide the format themselves, and aren't dictated to by those outside of the team.

randomname2005

Idleater wrote: »

Not only that, but even in scrum (where the term is daily scrum) it doesn't state you must stand. It was thought up to encourage rapid participation. Teams of course decide the format themselves, and aren't dictated to by those outside of the team.

Daily stand up.

Mrs OBumble

Idleater wrote: »

. Teams of course decide the format themselves, and aren't dictated to by those outside of the team.

Exactly my point.

My colleagues facilitated me by changing the format we had previously agreed. They did not have to do that. But they did so because I gave them a little actual information. If I'd just said "can we sit for the daily catchup please" without giving a good reason, they'd likely have said "no".

Augme

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

.
If a colleague was away with no explanation, came back refused to do any of the lifting which is part of the job, asked to sit during stand-up meetings, and would not give any reason even broad terms - then yes, I would look at them badly, and I would refuse to cover parts of their tasks.

Funnily enough, if I was managing someone who was to thick to connect the dots and figure out the situation then I wouldn't want them working for me. A win win for both parties I guess in that hypothetical situation I guess.

...Ghost...

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Exactly my point.

My colleagues facilitated me by changing the format we had previously agreed. They did not have to do that. But they did so because I gave them a little actual information. If I'd just said "can we sit for the daily catchup please" without giving a good reason, they'd likely have said "no".

That's a pretty nasty group you work with. "tell me why, or no".

Or perhaps they might have surprised you without you divulging personal medical information.