Picture of my children on Company website

[Edrun]

Hello there,
I have recently separated and as I was the primary carer for my children for the last 6 years I want to make sure they are still fully protected and not exposed to being unwillingly appearing online.

My ex-wife keeps them pending a court decision but she is into social media A LOT. I am not and we always agreed the children should be kept off it until they can decide for themselves.
However, I have now found out that my ex-wife's company, which is quite well known, has re-posted a picture of my children on their social media account with their age and name to promote their business and my ex-wife career.
The context is the following: Apparently my ex-wife had a presentation within the company about being a working mum (well, that's the first lie) with a story to tell during that conference. Then, someone on the board of the company posted the slide of the presentation with the 3 mums involved in the talk and a little summary about their family including picture of the children, age and names. This, to show how such a great employee and mum she is and, since the company re-posted it publicly to their millions of followers, how great the company is because of great people like her.

So 1st, it seems it was an internal document that is now in the open.
2nd, even though it was internal, I strongly ethically oppose to anyone using the picture of my children to promote their career or business.
3rd As I am not on social media, I am also told now that for years she put pictures of them and me on her FB page etc (I never go on them and never checked before as I trusted her) without informing me.

What should I do? The company is big, it is well talked about in the media at the moment as one of the next big IT companies, they posted the picture on their LinkedIn account and couldn't ignore what they were doing. 100K of people liked it including my ex-wife.
The kids (4 and 6) have of course no idea how they are being used or exposed.
I was thinking different options (but I'll have to create an account on LinkedIn):

• Privately send a message to the company and the executive who posted it in first place to ask them to remove it and wait to see
• on top of that I could publicly tell them (on LinkedIn and Twitter) I find it unethical to use the picture of children to promote their business. But if I do that, it might be pick-up by some journalists to make a story, which could have the opposite effect of what was intended unless there is no mention of the specific post and just a general statement.

What should I do. I have to say I am a bit annoyed that I have always cared for them, doing all the school trip and attendance as well as homework and outings on the week-end when my ex-wife was partying in NYC, LV, Berlin or Paris in her sooo cool company to the point the children kept telling me "We want mummy to bring us to school because it is always you".
So, now, I realised she has never put the kids interest before hers whatever it implies.

In fact, am I fully entitled to request the picture and post to be taken off since she might have agreed as she "liked" the post.

Thanks

The company will likely remove the post I’d you ask. You should do this privately.

I agree with the posters who think you sound bitter and difficult.

In the nicest way you need to get your shit together. If you approach this divorce the same way you post on here then you’ll be handing your ex all the ammunition she needs. You could be the worlds greatest guy and dad but you sound bitter and unhinged in your posts.

Dear Man
accusing people of this will get you deleted.
And not agreeing with you doesn’t make someone a Troll by the way
Whatever the truth you do sound very bitter and as if anything that happens to you you think is due to some great conspiracy.
If you go to Court with that attitude it won’t go well for you I suspect

This!

I would not have agreed to my children being on social media, especially not with their real names and ages. As a PP suggested, contact the company. They won't want the drama or potential problem so they'll likely remove them.

Fast forward. I have asked politely the employee who posted the document (which was an internal document originally) with the picture, names and ages of the children to remove it. One week later, she has totally ignored me (and doesn't have an automatic OOO message). Same from the data protection officer of the company.
So, once again, I am nice, I write "I am sure it was a genuine mistake, so please, blabla ..." and they don't care.
So. What do I do now? Leave the picture of my children forever so they can show how great they are because their employee can talk about their family at work?
I don't like to make trouble, but I like to have things done. I guess the next stage is to ask the CEO to have it removed and ask kindly again.

If they have permission from the other parent with Par then they can ignore you and are doing nothing illegal.

PR not par.

You can refer the matter to the ICO. However, unless there are good reasons for your objection, it is unlikely to get you anywhere. As others have said, the other parent with PR has consented. You could try taking action against her to get a Specific Issue Order preventing her consenting to such things, but I'm not convinced you will succeed.

If you have written to the data protection officer of the company requesting removal and not had an acknowledgment, I would chase it again and say in terms that unless you get a substantive response within 14 days you are going to report it to the Information Commissioner.

I agree with you. We are in the UK and not the US and even though the company is in the US, I suspect it is the UK law that prevail here.
Reading the other comments I am a big shocked that a parent could use the picture of the children to their company benefit.
Also we have equal parental rights and I suspect that if I object (in the UK) for the best interest of the children, that over rule whatever the other parent decides, am I right?

No, your PR does not overrule the other parent's PR. For major decisions (e.g. which school the children attend), you and your ex should try to agree and, failing that, you would have to go to court to resolve the issue. In situations such as this, the consent of one parent is enough. If you object strongly, you need to go to court.

By all means follow SirTarquin's advice, but I suspect the ICO won't be interested. The company has the required consent from a parent.

The ico won't give a shit. Consent has been given by a parent. They won't care. It's not a breach.

They actually state on their website that they really care about people's privacy.
The ironic thing is that I have to use their software for work and they have to custom their app to fit the requirements of the company I work for because of ... security and privacy. Ironic, isn't it.
Anyway, I sent another email to the employee who posted it but this time gave her 24 hours to remove the picture otherwise I'll seek the view of their CEO on the matter and see if he tells me to go see elsewhere. Possibly, but why would he be like that? It wouldn't be business wise since it is a non story for them to start with.

This!

Plus - you proclaim you are a good guy / nice guy. But your wife has custody of your children now. When previously YOU did ALL the parenting, school runs etc while she partied around the globe.

Not only does this not ring true, I am interested to know who does all the school runs etc now? Are you not worried that you have zero involvement in your children’s lives now, when you were so hands-on before you separated? Your children must be missing you.

You need to stop being so “nice” and get some sort of contact with your kids. That should be your priority right now.

I see the kids on the weekends as she wants them off. She impose the whole day and doesn't care what we do. She is not interested, she knows they be back on time, happy to have seen me and knows that I won't involve them in anything. Last week they told me "We think mummy HATES you. We don't know why, she says you left because you don't find her pretty. But we love you and we want to live with you when you have a home". To which I reply "Of course, but you'll need to wait for me to find one and the best way to help is to work well at school".
So how does she do with the kids now? After she had her parents around, she found an au pair she pays 40 quids a week. But I was told 2 days before she moved in even though she made contact with her 2 months ago.
So my solicitor asked to have her right to work in the UK (Gvt number for employer to check), degree to be allowed to take care of small children (otherwise you can't in the UK), first aid course etc... All normal. They refused and sent a pdf of her profile on aupairworld.com and argued "She have met the children and they find her wonderful, she also has the most amazing reference from former employers". The problem is that even on her profile her last employer as au pair was 3 years ago, she has no gvt code, no safety course. So my solicitor asked again and asked them that before this she should not be left with the sole care of the au pair. They don't care, they do what they want.
The way I knew about the au pair coming was my son who suddenly told me "There is something happening in the house but we can't tell you", and my daughter said "I can tell you, there is a nanny coming to replace you" and both said "We don't want her to come, we don't actually like her". But I can't say that because it would be using the trust they put in me.

Believe it or not, I have never do anything against that women and even made her presentations and prepared her interviews for getting her job as she needed to leave the previous one after she made two big mistakes.
If you don't believe me, there are some explaination online on how the system work in the UK and actually she does exactly what my lawyer told me she recommend doing to her female clients.

Yes I focus on seeing the children but if she says "no, not that day" I can't force anyone. An exemple is for Easter. 3 weeks before she said she'd take them for holidays for 5 days over the weekend (knowing it is the best time for me to see them). I replied "I don't object or agree, let's discuss this". She ignored that part of my email and replied to the rest of it. Then a week before I said that since she didn't reply, I want to see them. Her lawyer sent a letter to say "Your client has been informed weeks ago that our client wanted to leave on that weekend, it is unfortunate your client never replied via solicitors and now it is too late as she had pay for the airbnb". And we do nothing in return except saying it is unacceptable and we wish to have to missing time compensated, which .... they ignore.

But you are right, she must be a good mother and can take great care of the kids. On the day they left for the weekend I call to talk to the children (I thought they were leaving the next day) they answer (only when she wants) and my son was in underpants. I asked him to put his pyjama on and he shouted at me "I don't have any, Mummy forgot it" "so go and buy one " "Buy one? Really?". She actually forgot all of his clothes. I had to tell them on the phone to at least put his day t-shirt on. Comment from the mum "Come on, do it for Dad on the video" like if it was not for him but for me.

You know what? I have hundred of stories like that, hundreds. Since I was kicked out, my son has not handed any homework because she doesn't care.
By the way, I am not allowed to call them on Tues and Thurs because Mummy is out with her phone binge drinking in London like she has always done and won't be back before 2am. But well, any Brit knows how it is to find his wife sleeping in the staircase because she couldn't reach her bedroom after the Uber dropped her off.

Las but not least, they'll have 6 weeks of holiday in the summer, so her lawyer, in the middle of another insulting letter, says "Our client would like to take the opportunity to ask your client if he'd be kind enough to put in writing that she can go with the kids for 3 weeks on holiday abroad, of course in return she'd let him have them for 3 weeks and would consider granting him the right to bring them abroad". Note that she can take only 3 weeks off work and the au pair will come with them then leave to another country.
What would you reply to that?

If the au pair is from Ireland or has settled or pre-settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme (or is eligible to apply) or has a Youth Mobility Scheme visa, she does not need a separate right to work. If she was working in the UK three years ago and is from the EU, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland or Leichtenstein, she probably has pre-settled status and, if not, may well be eligible to apply.

There is no requirement for au pairs to have a degree - indeed, contrary to your post, a degree is not required to take care of small children in the UK. If you want to work in a nursery, you will need an NVQ but, like nannies, au pairs do not need any qualifications.

There is no requirement for au pairs (or nannies) to have first aid training.

You are way out of line in trying to impose conditions on what the au pair can and cannot do. The courts will not support you in that unless you have evidence that she is a safeguarding risk (e.g. she is a convicted child sex offender). Indeed, since the au pair's right to work doesn't affect you and the other things you list are not required for au pairs, the courts may well view your behaviour as unreasonable. Whether your ex employs an au pair and who she employs are none of your business. Similarly, if you chose to employ an au pair to look after your children when they are in your care, that would be none of your ex's business.

As for your final paragraph, I struggle to see what is wrong with that. Your ex is suggesting that you each have them for 3 weeks in the summer holidays and, as required by law, she is requesting your consent so that she can take them out of the country.

There is a lot of aggresivity here. Thanks for the reminder about how au pair works and actually yes they do need qualification if they are here to take care of children. But an au pair is not supposed to be a full time nanny and must have time to study or take classes, which is not the case since she stays only 3 months (which doesn't qualify to stay in the country as au pair, you need at least 6 months). She is not EU, she didn't work in the UK before and she can't provide a code for her status.
I am glad you still see nothing wrong with that.
As the father I have the right to know who this person is and to have also her DBS check (which they can't provide either). So, you have it all wrong since I do care for the children and that is why I ask these questions.
But anyway, I'll come back here once the situation is reversed.
I can't help noticing that all your posts prh47bridge are all incorrect. You seem to have a lot of certitudes that happen to be false. Well done..!

Bu the way, I got the pictures of my children removed by the company. I did exactly the opposite of what was suggested here since asking nicely didn't get me anywhere as they ignored me. Then I did as I felt, and in one hour, everybody seemed to have become quite reactive and the pictures, posts, everything, all gone..! Wonderful.
Even though I didn't mention my ex (as she was not the one who posted it) she seemed to be upset since as the last solicitors letters were aggressive again. In a way it deserves her as it shows her true face, but well, she does what she wants, if insulting is the way she wants to go.

I like the way everybody keep saying "the court will do this or do that".
It is like you think my ex wants to go to court. Surely not, because it would be a criminal court. As she told me a few months before changing the locks "I know you could tell things that would destroy our life, but I have a way to evict you and leave you in the street if you ever mention it".
She read that to me as she didn't want me to have any trace of her saying. She changed the locks, what should I do now?

Oh, and I don't hear anyone saying "Not only does this not ring true, I am interested to know who does all the school runs etc now?" anymore.

No, au pairs do not need qualifications. Check the government website.

Whilst au pairs normally will study, there is no legal requirement for them to do so. It is one of the factors considered in determining whether they are classed as a worker or employee, but not the only one. On its own, not studying does not make them a worker or employee.

As the father you do not have the right to know who this person is, and you are legally barred from seeing her DBS check as you are not her employer.

I do not have it all wrong. You do. The legal position is simple. You have absolutely no say in what your ex does with your children while they are in her care. You have no say in who they meet or her childcare arrangements.

Well done in getting the photos removed. The company didn't have to remove them as they had your ex's consent, but I never stated that they would not do so. I simply advised on the legalities of the situation.

My posts are not incorrect.

As you are posting on the legal forum, you will, of course, get advice on the law, including what would happen in the family courts, which is where disputes between you and your ex over childcare would end up. If you don't want to know the legal position, it is difficult to understand why you are posting here.

I agree @prh47bridge , you're completely correct.

if an au pair is doing what the gvt website says an au pair should do and should stay for the period of time stated. So you are wrong since she is called an au pair but doesn't do what an au peir do.
I also have parental rights and the right to know who is staying on her own with my kids when nobody else is watching. This is common sense. I would not trust my ex on her own with them (believe me, there is a reason why she managed only to stay only twice more than 24h with them in the last 6 years before she called for help), so I have little confidence in someone she chose who can't show any credential and elude questions and checks.
So the au pair is not an au pair and I have the right to check who she is.

You start with the assumption the au pair is like the perfect girl (not a girl anymore btw) who worked in the UK before, has all the credential, will stay the time required, etc... It is not the case, so she is not an au pair like the gvt webste defines it.

Stop focusing on trying to find the negative and concentrate on the positive progress made:

"Well done in getting the photos removed. The company didn't have to remove them as they had your ex's consent, but I never stated that they would not do so. I simply advised on the legalities of the situation."
Who told you she gave her consent? Once more a wrong assumption. She didn't post it.
Actually you are a bit like my ex, not very honest in the way you write things.

Since you're so sure you're correct, why are you asking in legal advice? Surely since you're so right you don't need advice from anyone?

The government website has a list of things an au pair might do and says that. if they do most of these things, they will not be classed as a worker or employee. It does not say they have to do all of these things. The government does not dictate the job description for au pairs. Indeed, even if the au pair does none of the things listed on the government website, all it means is they will be classed as a worker or employee. The employer can still call them an au pair if they want.

PR does not give you the right to know who is staying on their own with your children with no-one else watching. You may think that is common sense, but it is not the law. The law, quite rightly, takes the view that demanding to know what your children are doing and who they are with when in the care of the other parent is controlling and does not give you that right. The only way you can try to enforce the right you believe you have would be to take your ex to court. You would fail.

Your first post said that your ex "liked" the post with your children's picture. That implies she consented - indeed, the company could use her "like" as indicating consent. If she didn't consent, the company should not have used the photo.

@prh47bridge no idea how you’ve remained so calm and helpful. I’m sure the mum in this scenario is pleased OP is now an ex. I’d like to hear her side of the story. The control and entitlement shown raises lots of red flags.