Right to a job description

[Presonus]

I'll keep this open, I know the likelihood of gather thoughts opinions is low, but I don't like killing threads on half a story, so I'll probably stick with this through to the end

Had second investigation meeting today, where I was grilled on my subject access request, and effectively told that it was itself indicative of bullying/combatitive nature and that i had to justify the reason for it, I was also grilled on the fact that I should know that raising the SAR would cause the people who had to process it distress, and the fact i requested data that included records from people involved in the investigation (bear in mind I haven't been told who that is) is itself considered harassment.

It does seem, from what can be indirectly inferred that the processing of the SAR has been held/paused in order for this investigation to conclude,


I have kept to the legal and honest line which is, every company handles SAR different, I don't know what their processes are and I was simply excercising my right to access my information in anticipation of a legal dispute.

[ULA]

Please do keep us updated on this thread and if we can offer advice / support then we will.

By law, you can ask you for a copy of any information that is to do with you that your employer holds on you. It is your personal data, and you have a right to see it. They do have one calendar month to respond to the request, although if it was a very complex request, or if you made multiple requests, they can take an extra two calendar months to respond. Your employer must let you know there will be a delay before the end of the first calendar month.

[Presonus]

Thanks I will keep updating

I was surprised that the investigating manager knew of the SAR, I considered it a subject - controller request as opposed rather than an employee to employer request, but what do I know!

Interestingly, years ago I did do a similar SAR and this ended up being considered as an executive complaint, and one of the findings were my employer should have more robust protocols in place and one of the criticisms was the sharing between colleagues of the fact I'd done a SAR. I still have that finding so I will pass it on to my solicitor (my solicitor is out of office for a period so I am a bit short on support)

My personal opinion that the SAR is somehow conducive to me showing aggression is laughable in my opinion. I can't believe they'd waste the time.

Due diligence, not aggression. People who want to see things through properly and fairly do due diligence. Like asking for information when allegations are raised against them, and using all means if people get evasive.

I love how doing this SAR is being used against me.

[Presonus]

No news, except from a conversation i've had with the ICO who have confirmed the details of the SAR should not be shared - within reason - the within reason being described by the ICO as what disclosure is actually required to execute the request.

Since there is no functional need for the investigation/disciplinary team to be made aware of a SAR for its execution does appear my firm has over-reached itself by informing the investigation team of the request.

I put this query to the ICO explicitly, still deciding (amongst some guidance from the ICO) how to react to this but it is more evidence that this company is just doing as it wants.

[Presonus]

Update time

I have been told a few days ago by the company data protection team that the SAR will take a further 2 months to process due to it being complex

I have asked for a substantiation of why this data request is being considered complex given that:
- the ICO does not consider a large request as a reason to consider it complex
- the company has previously undertaken similar SAR's without issue

The data protection team have not acknowledged or responded to this request for clarification. I am not sure if I can force them to, but the ICO site does appear to state that a company must be able to justify an extension, so it must be obligated to answer in some way.


Moving on to the next update.


I have been given access to the second investigation notes, where I was grilled on the reason for the SAR. The investigator states it is their right to know about the SAR as they need to know all circumstances around an investigation


This conflicts directly with ICO advice, who I've spoken to in the meantime as above who state that knowledge of a SAR should only be used in the purpose of executing it.

What makes this more interesting is I raised a SAR years ago which ended up being subject to an executive directors complaint, whilst I didn't make the allegation myself, one finding was that my employer had put itself and business processes at risk by allowing people to talk amongst themselves about my SAR and a recommendation of that complaint was that the company tighten up its training. It seems this hasn't been effective.

So what i've done is I've let the dust settle for a couple of days to go back to the ICO and my solicitor, ensure we have a three way consensus of our understanding and position, and resulting from that I have bundled all this information up, including screenshots of the SAR being raised as part of the investigation and the executive complaint with the concerns about the disclosure of SAR requests and their potential compromise of business processes and I have printed this out and sent it to the company DPO as a formal complaint. This of course will be completely seperate to any disciplinary, but it does raise some serious concerns about the company's flippant attitude to SAR requests. I have made it clear that the company's previous fear that the way SAR's were being handled could compromise processes (such as investigations) has actually had that outcome in this case.



Final update - job descriptions. The reason I made this thread in the first place was even before the suspension happened, I was having a hard time getting a job description from my employer, I had been expected by my colleagues to undertake the same role as them, but my manager had denied me access to systems that would allow me to do that. He also kept calling me a junior (i am not) but wouldn't commit to how my role was different. My current pay is not even within the banding of my colleagues (it's lower then the lowest) and my manager has told me directly I could not be a full analyst like my colleagues at this time.

I have found, that the documentation for the disciplinary is being filled out with me being given the same job title as my colleagues, now this may seem a trivial point, it isn't because of my role confusion. So I asked for this to be corrected, and they have amended it however have given me a completely fictitious job title, which I've never had (it's now Junior) - I've never been a Junior, so I've told them again that this is not right, and does not reflect my role and this is important if they are accusing me of not undertaking my role effectively and after telling me they used my job description as the source to identify my role they have stopped responding to me now altogether.

I have raised my concerns to executive management that my employer does not appear to know what my role is, and questioned how they can reference my job description in telling me what my role is, but don't seem able to provide me a copy of it. I politely asked for a copy of this document, since they were referencing it and this has led to a cessation of all communications with me.


So yeah, my SAR has been kicked in the long grass, my employer is not responding to requests for a job description/up to date particulars but has confirmed it exists, meanwhile the investigation team appears to be stuck at deciding what my role actually is, all their guesses so far have been wrong.

---


The irony here is the team is vastly under-resourced and overworked and I WANT to do more work (but I also want it well defined and I don't want to be subject to pay discrimination, I am as qualified as anyone else and I am disabled). The common sense solution is to give me the support to succeed at my role and some structure, and mediate the environment for some time to allow relations to recover.

Of course, the company wouldn't entertain such a proposal - and would rather chase any old errors they can dig up to get me replaced.

Imagine, when i walked into the room a few weeks ago thinking it was a return to work interview and it was in fact a suspension - imagine, just hypothetically it actually had been a return to work interview, and we'd gone through the usual motions of getting me back into work - there'd be no SARs, there'd be no defensiveness, I wouldn't be dealing with solicitors - I am defending myself aggressively, because I am under attack. There were many ways to tackle these issues and the road we've gone down was their choice.

[ULA]

Presonus thank you for the continued update and I given the last paragraph of your post appreciate how frustrating this must be for you.

[Presonus]

Hey, thanks

TBH it was a bit of an emotional paragraph! I am diagnosed with anxiety, and depression (and currently being assessed for some other things) and can be a bit emotive at times, I am doing my best to be a bit 'tough' at the moment,so much so I have a lot of friends telling me right now they wish they had the same balls to stand up to HR, but the bottom line is - it's not a fight I chose, it's not a fight I want, but I don't want to roll over and die either. This isn't right.


It is frustrating, for me the big annoyance is the fact this isn't a level playing field - in a civilised world, it would be the case that if you have a dispute, you'd hear the allegation, you'd hear the evidence, both sides would say their peice and someone someone independent would judge it on its merits. In my case the company have denied each and every attempt by me to understand the case, it has even refused legal obligaitons (according to ACAS I do have the legal right to job particulars such as a description of my job or a title) and it is relying on me to go into investigation meetngs unprepared to make it's case, they have the audacity to state, and I have this in writing, that my agressive stance on defending myself is indicative of an agressive nature.

I am not being funny, but this sounds like someone trying to justify the shooting of a bear by poking it until its peed off and defends itself.

So yeah, frustration is an understatement.

No real update today, all my emails requesting access to my information are still without response, however according to the rail mail my DPO complaint was delivered by hand.

I am going to see this through and defend robustly, 10000000% even if it kills me.

[Presonus]

So - time for an update

I have received written notification today that the reason my SAR is being delayed *under the guise of it being complex* is for two reasons.

1 - there is a lot of data to redact
2 - i am under an active suspension

I appreciate 1) can be argued, but the 2) has me very concerned. The ICO have told me an employer should not be factoring my situation into the SAR process.


These reasons were given in writing.