CWP Data Protection

[shadow274]

I was put onto community work placement with Seetec.

 

 

At my first meeting I signed a data protection sheet which I was told is just for jobs and the jobcentre, but after looking round various sites its got me worried. Does this mean seetec can now look at anything to do with me inc my medical records etc

 

 

I had one job search day there and then I was ill and filled in a sick form for the 14 days, I thought I'd just be back at seetec on my next job search day, but after going the jobcentre I was re referred to seetec for CWP

 

 

So does this mean I'm starting from the beginning again and will I have to sign another data protection letter or will they just use my old one and is there anyway I can take permission back so they can't look at any info regarding me?

[antone]

Seetec can't see your medical records, if you mean the stuff that's on file with your own doctor. They can, probably, see whatever is on file with the DWP. In most cases they probably won't look at that information, but in theory they can see it as they're part of the same data chain as the DWP.

[antone]

Sorry, meant to add: they don't have easy access to the information, but they can find it out if they really want to.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Shadow,

By signing the form that you call 'data protection letter' you actually waive your privacy rights under the law. You have given Seetec the authority to give your employment and contact details to anyone they choose on the pretence that they are trying to place you in employment or on an employment or training programme.

 

It could also enable Seetec to compile lists of claimants' contact details and sell them to advertisers, shysters, con artists of all sorts, etc.

 

I reckon your medical health records would be safe enough, but any details that they manage to gather along with assessments or conclusions of your mental or physical health that they come to, qualified or not, may also be shared willy-nilly.

 

I would suggest that on your next visit you should issue them with a letter withdrawing you consent for the waiving of your basic privacy rights, giving the concerns that have come to your attention since signing the form as your reason.

 

You could inform them that your consent to contacting potential employers will not be unreasonably withheld but that you will decide on a case by case basis.

 

At my last signing on appointment my adviser raised the subject of CWP and he told me that he will be discussing it further at my next appointment with a view to referring me. From what he has already said about it I have concluded that he is lying to me so I am preparing myself for a showdown.

[Mr.P]

It could also enable Seetec to compile lists of claimants' contact details and sell them to advertisers, shysters, con artists of all sorts, etc.

 

Whilst this might be possible, IF Seetec (or any other DWP contractor) were to do this, they would be in real big trouble. The DWP has strict rules on what can and can not be done with claimant's personal data, and all suppliers are required to abide by the same rules.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Whilst this might be possible, IF Seetec (or any other DWP contractor) were to do this, they would be in real big trouble. The DWP has strict rules on what can and can not be done with claimant's personal data, and all suppliers are required to abide by the same rules.

Hello Mr P,

 

If Seetec (or any other DWP contractor) were properly held to account for much of what they do outside their contractual obligations they would be in real big trouble. You will be aware, more than most, if only from stuff that gets reported on this site, that some of those administrators should be in jail if due regard was given to any justice in the system.

 

Why should they forego this lucrative [problem] on feeble rules that they know the DWP would turn a blind eye to. I recall reading somewhere that the DWP itself, via its UJM site, may have been complicit in selling lists of personal details held on its databases.

One of the prime permissible objections to using UJM is that on their own admission they can't guarantee the security of claimant's personal details.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Whilst this might be possible, IF Seetec (or any other DWP contractor) were to do this, they would be in real big trouble. The DWP has strict rules on what can and can not be done with claimant's personal data, and all suppliers are required to abide by the same rules.

Hello Mr P,

 

If Seetec (or any other DWP contractor) were properly held to account for much of what they do outside their contractual obligations they would be in real big trouble. You will be aware, more than most, if only from stuff that gets reported on this site, that some of those administrators should be in jail if due regard was given to any justice in the system.

 

Why should they forego this lucrative activity on feeble rules that they know the DWP would turn a blind eye to. I recall reading somewhere that the DWP itself, via its UJM site, may have been complicit in selling lists of personal details held on its databases.

One of the prime permissible objections to using UJM is that on their own admission they can't guarantee the security of claimant's personal details.

[shadow274]

I had my Seetec appointment the other day (which I was re referred to), and they said they'd have to get me to fill everything out again as it starts from the beginning

 

 

I went in a room with a bloke who started putting my details into the computer asking when I'd last worked etc

 

 

Then he gave me an information booklet with a page that tears out for me to sign which they keep. Last time this had contact past and future employers on it etc and I did sign it, only to get worried about what information they could actually see

 

 

So this time I asked what am I actually signing here, is this a data protection waiver

 

 

To which he replied nasty 'what are you on about, don't sign it and you'll be sanctioned'

To which I replied 'I only asked you what is it I'm signing, and all you say is you have to or you'll be sanctioned'

He then says 'I never said you'd be sanctioned, I said you'd have a sanction doubt'

Really I say for not signing something

 

 

So after him getting like that over me asking a simple question made me think what the hell is going on and I refused to sign

 

 

He then told me to leave

 

 

I can't believe a grown man would behave like that, spitting his dummy out because I dared to ask what am I signing, when all that was needed was a explanation not just to say you have to or its a sanction

If they have to ask me to sign something, then it must be up to me whether to sign it or not - how can you get done for that

 

 

The more I'm thinking of it, the more I'm shocked at his behaviour, all over a simple question. He made me feel uncomfortable the way he reacted, it just seems a bit weird

[Mr.P]

I can't believe a grown man would behave like that, spitting his dummy out because I dared to ask what am I signing, when all that was needed was a explanation not just to say you have to or its a sanction

If they have to ask me to sign something, then it must be up to me whether to sign it or not - how can you get done for that

 

I have one of these "advisers" on tape, not only spitting her dummy out, but throwing all the toys out of her pram too. It is well worth recording all meetings just in case there is any dispute over what was (or wasn't) said.

 

As for raising a benefit doubt over not signing a form, this is just hot air on his part. Numerous Freedom of Information requests have been made over the years, and the DWP keep repeating the same answer: "A claimant can not be forced to sign DPA waivers".

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Nice to see you back Shadow and thanks for updating us on your situation. Also, well done for standing up for your privacy and data protection rights.

 

Mr P. is right to confirm your own view when he says:

 

'As for raising a benefit doubt over not signing a form, this is just hot air on his part. Numerous Freedom of Information requests have been made over the years, and the DWP keep repeating the same answer: "A claimant can not be forced to sign DPA waivers".'

 

You could consider writing to your Jobcentre adviser or manager describing your experience at the Seetec interview. If the Jobcentre hasn't raised it with you yet no doubt they will at your next appointment. Might be helpful if you were ready.

 

How you did not refuse to participate in the Seetec placement, as your attendance at the interview confirms.

 

How you did not refuse to take part in any Seetec activity since none had been proposed.

 

How you merely asked for clarification on what it was that you were being asked to sign.

 

How you were not given the asked for clarification but instead threatened with a sanction if you did not sign, then ordered to leave the premises.

 

How you did not refuse to sign the document until the interviewer [Name him/her if possible] refused to give you the clarification that you asked for but instead threatened and attempted to intimidate you.

 

Well done again and good luck with the next phase.

[shadow274]

So I went to the jobcentre the other day and my advisor said I heard you walked out of Seetec.

I told her what happened, but she has still re-referred me back there, even after me saying I don't want to see him, the way he reacted is not normal.

She said it has helped lots of people find jobs and I'm being too negative not wanting to go and nobody else has had a problem with this bloke, just me.

 

 

I now have a appointment with Seetec on Tuesday, which I really don't think i'm going to be able to go to.

 

 

Funny how every course I've been put on is classed as a great thing that will get me a job. I did MWA last year and was told I had a 90% more chance of getting a job because of it. Sick of hearing the same things all the time.

 

 

I don't want to do this CWP for 6 months, I think its a disgusting thing to make unemployed people do this

I see people on community service all the time near where I live, minibuses turning up with community payback written on them. They seem do be doing the empty flats up

and it makes me think I've not broken the law but I'm getting punished for being unemployed.

[shadow274]

Oh and she also said, me not wanting to do this, makes her think I don't really want a job, and I have got used to being on benefits

[shadow274]

I just don't want to be talked down to, told off, or looked at as if i'm total ****

 

 

and then to get told lies all the time, that these courses will help. I might of believed it the first time, but I've lost count now of the number of pointless courses I've done and none has made any difference

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Looks like your Jobcentre adviser is determined to sign you up for CWP and she does not appear to be concerned about how many rules she breaks doing it, including being abusive. May be worth while checking that the process by which you were referred to CWP by your Jobcentre adviser was done correctly. Did the Mandatory Activity Notification (MAN) letter comply with the requirements set out in the official Guidance, for example? You could have all this sorted in time for your next interview with her, which gives you plenty of time.

 

In the meantime, your first hurdle to overcome is your interview on Tuesday at Seetec. There isn't much time to go into extensive preparation but there are few basic points that you should be aware of and familiar with if you wish to continue to refuse to sign any documents that have the effect of waiving your data protection rights and your rights under the Health & Safety at Work Act.

 

If you are determined not to submit to signing such documents you are well within your rights to do so, as has already been discussed, and you can't be sanctioned for refusing.

 

Remember you are not refusing to participate in the Community Work Placement, as your attendance at the interview confirms.

 

Remember that you merely asked for clarification on what it was that you were being asked to sign. (You need not refuse to sign immediately, wait until your request for clarification is denied, or you hear it and are not satisfied).

 

Remember you are not refusing to take part in, or sign up for, any activity or placement that Seetec has arranged for you since none had been proposed.

 

If the interview runs true to form trying to get you to sign the waiver documents will take first priority so there will be small chance of getting as far as discussions/agreement on the actual activity/placement being proposed.

 

Just in case you do get to the stage where you get to discuss the actual activity/placement it would be a good idea to read the document "Community Work Placements Provider Guidance" at this link:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/473065/community-work-placements-provider-guidance.pdf

 

This will give you some idea of what to expect as well as enable you to check that correct procedures are being followed.

 

Make your questions sound like genuine enquiries, not like you were making difficulties or putting obstacles in the way. Let the interviewer lose the rag first, you try not to lose it at all. When s/he does lose it (nothing like seeing you calm and composed in the face of their frustration, anger and threats to guarantee them going off on one). and if or when the intimidation and the threat phase kicks in don't argue just keep repeating:

 

"I am not refusing to sign anything at this stage, merely asking for clarification of what I am being asked to sign. I am not refusing to participate in any activity or to go on any placement, you haven't proposed any yet."

 

When you are invited to leave just ask "Are you terminating the interview?" before you make a move to go, nothing else. If the answer is in the affirmative at least twice, just leave quietly.

 

Not sure if you have a digital audio recorder but it sure would be handy to have one in such circumstances. They are sold on Amazon from about £10. Argos sell them from around £35.

[konark]

Oh and she also said, me not wanting to do this, makes her think I don't really want a job, and I have got used to being on benefits

 

Explain to her that is not a logical deduction. You want work not to be a slave. It's like me saying I'm selling my house, you then say give it me for free, I say no chance, you say 'then you don't really want to sell it do you'. In what universe would anyone infer that!

[konark]

Just keep refusing to sign anything, but stress you're happy to do a placement. They can't send you on a placement without a signature, don't get fobbed off by them saying it's for elf'n'safety, you don't need to sign up to the laws on that anymore than any other laws. If they say its the law , say 'what law?'. The whole CWP is being given the bullet at the end of March so try and resist it for a few months, they do seem keen to get a few on the last courses though. You can always pull a sicky for up to 2 weeks twice a year and don't forget your 2 week holiday entitlement. If you can get a fit note (sick note) off a doctor you can delay it 3 months by which time CWP induction will be over.

[Mr.P]

Please consider recording all future conversations. If an "adviser" tells you to leave before the conclusion of business and then goes on to file a Failure to Attend benefit doubt, you have the evidence on record.