O/T- National Dismissal Database- yes really!

[electrica77]

has anyone else seen this today? (I couldn't see another thread on it)

BBC NEWS | Magazine | Bust-up with the boss?

I think this is outrageous! The ramifications are massive. What next? Listing everyone who has had a disciplinary or made a grievance? Dismissals are frequently unfair and unprovably so. And if no charges are brought, this just serves as a 1984 style character database. And what next? Start listing 'problem' employees? I am utterly utterly horrified. Is there anything CAG can do with this? We all know just how accurate the agencies who hold our details can be, and how effective the Information Commisioner is.

We can't allow people to become unemployable by way of a blacklist- the cost to the taxpayer is massive, it will encourage black market labour and poverty for those who cannot find decent employment. It also raises HUGE questions about civil liberties and data accuracy. When will these people be allowed to move on? After 6 years, as with credit?

Just appalling on so many levels! Sorry I'm not being incredibly articulate, but I'm really angry. What is happening to this country?

ARGH ARGH ARGH ARGH!!!!

[babybear39]

I agree completely. This is a gross breach of human rights and data protection. It would allow any employer with any grudge to ruin a persons life by effectively making them unemployable.

Goerge Orwell got it right, all but the date

Only the police should have such information because a large number of these accusations are never prosecuted because of lack of evidence.

[Spiceskull]

It is pretty disgusting - I thought the whole process of disciplinary procedures at work was that they were confidential. After all, you are guilty of theft from the company, they can sack you for it...but woe betide any manager who passes this fact on to other members of staff...

However, there is light at the end of the tunnel. I doubt for one minute that any contract of employment will include terms to the effect "...we may pass your data on to third parties..."

ANY disclosure of this type is a) a breach of confidentiality, b) a breach of contract and c) a breach of the Data Protection Act.

On b) specifically, there is the argument that as you have now been dismissed, then there is no contract to be breached. Fair and logical point, but then what remains is an outright act of willful defamation and misrepresentation, and as this is intentionally published, the first time it happens we will see the company concerned being sued for millions...

Personally I think that any company using this service to post negative comments about staff/ex staff is on a one-way trip to the cleaners...

[Spiceskull]

...and another thing...I am sure that legislation was passed, expressly forbidding a company providing a bad/negative reference for ex-employees: the rule of thumb was something like "if you can't give a good/neutral reference, then don't give one at all..."

To me this looks like a back door approach to negative referencing, and as usual, the "excuse" is a protective one: "staff theft costs the economy billions every year..."

This kind of database will not prevent theft, its whole raison d'etre, and therefore as it does not suit the intended purpose it should not exist.

Finally, there is a "readers comment" that sums the whole thing up nicely:

At the same time, we all know those employees responsible for huge thefts and loss making will seldom have their details added to any blacklist for the simple reason that the companies they have defrauded will not want the publicity it would attract.

[ncf355]

"
Mike Schuck, chief executive of AABC, says that theft by members of staff costs the British economy billions of pounds each year and rejects the notion that the register is a blacklist.
He says that all participating companies will be obliged to abide by the Data Protection Act and that workers named on the database, maintained by AABC, will have the right to change their entries if they are inaccurate."






Oh yes, we know how well this kind of approach works



I mean, look how quick the likes of experian correct issues with our credit data



We're worrying about nothing, obviously!

[Quoth]

Just point out that CIFAS already operates what it calls a staff fraud database. They are very reluctant to explain who has access to such a database or whether information would be provided (if held) were CIFAS to be sent a Subject Access Request or how incorrect data would be queried.

[networkrail]

This is a disgrace and the unions should be up in arms about it.

Nwr

[mr.ton]

The only ones i blame for this is the facist New Labour government.
They want to criminalize everyone so that we all work for the state effectivley on benefits...in the hope that we will keep them in power.
As the recent local elections showed - the public are voting against them & there's nothing they can do to stop us

[Spiceskull]

I'm also thinking of other aspects, ones where the employer is not even ill-intentioned: supposing someone planted an item in someone else's bag, and that person got caught and accused of theft? A police investigation would/should eliminate the employee by using fingerprinting (if they went that far) - an accusation by the employer removes even this slight chance to prove your innocence...

[mexico86]

This is just one further step in the gradual erosion of liberty in this country.

[tomterm8]

this database would last for about ten minutes, before the first multi-million libel action destroyed it (remember, you are entitled to legal aid if on benefits

[JonCris]

Tom I don't think you would need to be on benefits.

I suspect there is many a lawyer who would love to take on a victim of this appalling outfit as a client on a no win no fee basis

Also I think Liberty might get involved pro bono

[JonCris]

Originally Posted by ncf355

"
Mike Schuck, chief executive of AABC, says that theft by members of staff costs the British economy billions of pounds each year and rejects the notion that the register is a blacklist.
He says that all participating companies will be obliged to abide by the Data Protection Act and that workers named on the database, maintained by AABC, will have the right to change their entries if they are inaccurate."






Oh yes, we know how well this kind of approach works



I mean, look how quick the likes of experian correct issues with our credit data



We're worrying about nothing, obviously!

Yeah & where does he get those figures....... from the Dept of Guessworks no doubt ............ billions my arse

[JonCris]

Also "employees have the right to correct the data if they wish" bull
My 1st question is how would the know it's been put there......... & 2nd why should they have to prove they are inoccent.

I do hope the Information Commissioners Office hasn't given this outfit approval & if not comes down on this lot like a ton of bricks

[JonCris]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Just point out that CIFAS already operates what it calls a staff fraud database. They are very reluctant to explain who has access to such a database or whether information would be provided (if held) were CIFAS to be sent a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) or how incorrect data would be queried.

Their database is not protected by law & as such is not privileged. The reason they are vague is that they know that if they publicly admit the right of access & if the subject should enforce that right only to find the data to be false or inaccurate the subject can sue the pants of both them & the source