Big fall out - who is (most) in the wrong?

[Dibrew]

I would welcome opinions on this situation which is currently playing out.

Person A is a masseuse, working part time evenings out of a leisure centre attached to a secondary school.

Person A told Person B that she had terminated a session with the male partner of Person C. Person A doesn’t know Person C, but she knows Person B is friends with them.

Person B tells Person C of what was said by Person A. The session was terminated due to him offering money towards the end of this for sexual services.

Person C’s partner strongly denies this. Person C accuses Person A of breaking data protection rules and says Person B is attempting to shit stir.

She's a self-employed masseuse working out of a leisure centre as I understood it. @Dibrew , is that right?

And if you told Sue about some guy she knows sexually harassing you isn't a problem. No one has a right to privacy of being a sexual harasser. Women should share with other women the men to avoid.

Im sure that would have been mentioned.

Very little information or context was given

C is a fool for believing her partner and he is a disgrace.

B could have minded her own business but isn't to blame.

Poor A trying to do her job and getting sexually harassed.

no, I ready it 3 times and ended up giving AB&C names Annabel, Belinda and Carole

Is that really all your life consists of? Receiving Amazon packages? Or is that a euphemism for something a bit more spicy?

I'm basing it on the fact the masseuse at my leisure centre is self-employed and rents a room.

The information given was that B and C are friends. Work with that.

It was my feeble attempt at humour, so feeble in fact that it went right over your head.

Yes but no relationship was stated between A and B. Feel free to keep the secrets of those who sexually harass you. I won’t be advocating for that, myself

Person B is in the wrong for passing the information on to the partner C.

Very feeble, but I applaud the intention.

C sexually abused A

regardless of what A does for a living, having someone sexually abuse doesn't mean the perpetrator C's partner gets to stop that accusation due to gdpr

Thanks.

Men are scum.

(NAM yada yada)

Yes correct

You'd still inform the leisure centre as usually, you'd be under their procedures to some degree as you are offering services in their building.

It's not about the right to privacy, it's about whether it is a breach of professional conduct to handle it this way.

In my job, we do sort of have people akin to a masseuse who provide services to our clients as part of our overall services. So we are like a leisure centre with all the facilities and staff provided and employed directly by us, but some other services are provided by outside agencies that we subcontract and they deliver their staff deliver specialised services from our buildings.

If any of us (either those of us directly employed by my employer, or those subcontracted to provide services out of our facilities) handled a sexual harassment accusation in this way, and our employer came to know about it through C and his partner, then A would be in some trouble for their actions. That's not the way to do things.

If A also wanted to officially pursue the allegation, they could and that would be pursued separately.

Well C is an absolute idiot if she believes her sleazy partner.

Person a shouldn't have said anything to person b as it was putting b in the middle of something that was nothing to do with them.

Person A shouldn't have disclosed client information to anyone. If Person A had an issue they deal with that, ban the person, report to the leisure centre etc.

Person B is a gossip and shit stirring.

Person C is embarrassed but it's not their privacy that has been breached.

The customer could complain to the employer assuming A works for the Leisure centre rather than self employed.

No. But there are presumably processes at the leisure centre where she works. Processes for her to follow in respect of what happened during her massage session and very possibly procedures around what she is allowed to disclose as gossip around her clients, even in terms of who her clients are. We don’t know what those processes and rules are, assuming there are any, and may depend on whether she hires space at the Leisure centre for her private business or whether she is employed by them .

I don't think sexual advances falls under protected information. I also don't think that massage therapist is a protected title- therefore should be held to any professional standards. So I guess the only thing is the policy at the leisure centre- which probably doesn't have guidence on that specific situations.

I am also not entirely sure that a sexual advance would meet the threshold for sexual harassement but I could be wrong because there was a risk of violence due to the circumstances.

I think it is wrong that B told C as this is could actually put some people in difficult (possibly danger). Even if it was innocently or with the best intentions.

Yes exactly. So A and B weren't even friends. That's what I said. Yes it doesnt say they were or were not colleagues, but I'd assume they'd have mentioned if B had professional standing in these events.

Yeah this. Why should she just keep quiet about the 'anonymous' man who sexually harassed her in a professional capacity?

This. Person A should have reported the matter but not told anyone/ gossiped.