Internal breach of confidentiality by PA - sanctions?

[JessieMcJessie]

I am one of 2 managers in a small team. The other manager has handed in his resignation but is working a fairly long notice period (more than 3 months). It was decided that only those who have an absolute need to know would be told about the resignation until closer to his leaving date. This is partly because he has a health problem that he doesn't want people to know about.

One of our junior team came to us recently to say she had heard from someone in another department that he was leaving. We've traced the source of the leak to a "floating" PA who was in our dept a few weeks ago covering for one of our own PAs' annual leave. Our own PAs were not aware of the resignation. The secretary was not told directly as part of her duties, nor was she given access to any emails or documents that would have referred to it.

When interviewed by HR the floating PA admitted to knowing the information but claimed that (a) she couldn't remember how she learned it and (b) said she had told nobody. HR are now saying that she can't be given a formal warning because she hasn't admitted spreading the gossip and they don't want to upset her as she is "good" and might leave!

I am furious. She's obviously lying (we trust the person who said the PA told her). We need to know how she found out because we have been incredibly careful with the information - all relevant emails encypted, no hard copies of anything relevant, all discussions behind closed doors. If we've made a mistake or not appreciated a gap in the confidentiality procedures then we need to know about it to prevent future leaks.

But, perhaps more importantly, surely her behaviour can't go unchecked? She knew that there had been no announcement of his leaving so would have realised that the information was confidential and yet she gossiped about it. Is it really right from an HR perspective that she can't be sanctioned unless she confesses?

She has been questioned by HR. She will (I presume) have gathered from this that you are all not happy with what she did.

Now, let it go.

It is done. HR is right, unless you put sanctions on all 5 who "knew" (because they must have been the source of her knowledge) as well as the PA you cannot, fairly, do anything.

You all fucked up. You were not tight enough with the info.

Look at how to deal with the fall out (people knowing your colleague is leaving) rather than picking the scab of the information leaking.

You just cannot know.

I was once in a position similar to the PA, and treated incredibly badly for a year by people who thought I'd passed confidential information on to my housemate, who also worked in the same company. He had a serious falling out with the guy who was supposed to be taking over from our boss, and handed in his notice, together with a list of complaints about the new guy, which he thought our boss should know about. (TBF the complaints were valid, the rest of the staff knew about everything and would complain endlessly about it amongst themselves, but none of them had the guts to do anything about it.) Nothing in the letter was not common knowledge, which he'd heard when he was in the office (he wasn't office-based, but would be in the office many times during the day).

The general assumption was that I must have told him these things, as I was in the office full-time, and the others refused to believe that he could have learnt these things any other way (despite openy talking about these issues in front of him). So for a year I was bullied by the others in the office (I was too meek to say anything, and they wouldn't have listened anyway).

The stupid thing was, when I left, the guy in question (whose misdeeds were later discovered by an official body and he finally got the sack a few years later) sat me told and advised me about something personal to me, which was absolutly nothing to do with him, which I had never told him about and which he had only heard from office gossip. Am pretty sure he never realised the irony himself.

What I'm trying to say is that although it looks clear cut to you the truth may be very different. Unless HR has absolute proof you cannot punish the PA, either officially or otherwise.

Someone up thread called this a 'witch hunt' I have to agree.

Imo you should drop this as advised by HR! They know what they are talking about and it looks to me like you are on a bit of a witch hunt here. You have no proof how the info was leaked, as you say. I agree also that the colleague who left his screen on whilst unattended acted irresponsibly and it is really his fault for not guarding the information properly.

If you continue on this track, the PA might complain to HR about being bullied, so you'd better stand down unless HR recommends otherwise.

What I a utterly baffled by is, how, if this issue is such a top secret, you can go onto a public forum and tell us about this man's illness. There was no need for you to reveal the details of his condition. I find your conduct very questionable and would recommend you have this thread deleted, in case anyone else regnises this situation.

Xpost kato. I agree with the witch hunt bit.

The PA isn't the source of the leak, the colleague who left confidential information on his unattended workstation is the source of the leak.

Yes she shouldn't have gone spreading the info (although your assertion that she should have known it was confidential when other leavers aren't confidential, because it hadn't been put out in an email yet is a bit tenuous) but these things have a habit of getting out eventually anyway. All you can do now is minimise the fall-out.

Harley no need for the sanctimonious lecture thanks. I guarantee that it is impossible to identify any real-life individuals from anything in this thread.

Not sanctimonious at all, just surprised at the fact that someone who complains about indiscretion talks about a man's serious illness of a public board.

*On, not of

As I said there was no need to reveal the nature of his illness in order to get help on this this thread, was there?

Harley there is no man with cancer. Does that help?

No?

"Yes, let's castigate the man with cancer, great idea."

I must have misunderstood this comment. If I did, my apologies. However, I do think you should stop pursuing the issue at work as per my first post.

She was in the wrong, but someone leaving wouldn't ordinarily be the kind of information that is incredibly sensitive and therefore blindingly obviously to everyone that it must not be mentioned at all. It's information that everyone will know shortly anyway, and thinking that type of information can be kept to a tiny pool of people in a normal organisation for any length of time is naïve.

She shouldn't have mentioned anything, and I'm sure she has been/is being told that. A final warning isn't warranted IMO.

I was told something by a senior colleague in confidence after I handed in my notice. I didn't say anything but about 3 weeks later, when it was still "in confidence" I was told the exact same information by 2 other people - one of whom was external to the organisation.

I alerted the colleague to let him know that the story was out but that I hadn't spoken to anybody and on hearing the story I hadn't corroborated or indicated that it was true.

The point is - it can be quite extraordinary how information can get out.

I don't think Harley's lecture is sanctimonious - I think it's spot on.

I hope the PA, any of the other workers in your company, or the man himself (or his wife) aren't on MN. You have put a lot of unique detail in your posts.

a final warning isn't warranted, and if you take any action against her whatsoever, you also have to take action against the manager who was stupid enough to leave a private and confidential email open on an unattended desktop, whether or not you have a lock screen policy. You can't punish one pay grade and not the other for the same offence. It does however seem that you have an almost vindictive desire to get shot of this PA and are simply searching for a reason to do so.
The guy is leaving, it was going to be announced within a very short amount of time. Assuming it's not a stock market sensitive piece of information, get over it.

If it was made clear to her that she was never to divulge any information whilst working for you then and signed to that effect while unprofessional, not disciplinary action cannot be warranted? People gossip in the workplace.

Somehow the information got out, it might have been somebody in the know who told her , they might be having an affair, she is their confidante, who knows.

You are determined to blame her and have her held up as an example and just need to let it go now.

People. The names and all identifying details have been changed to protect the confidentiality of all involved in an analagous but different situation.

You can't punish one pay grade and not the other for the same offence.

Leaving a confidential email open on a desktop in an office with the only passing traffic being a PA who is supposed to understand professional discretion.

Reading something that is patently confidential and which you know you are not supposed to read and then gossiping about it.

Not the same offence.

Harrassing someone over something you have no hard proof for - check your bullying policy

But you don't actually know that she read an e-mail.

You're guessing.

You can't possibly expect HR to take disciplinary action on the basis of your suspicion, which the PA nor anyone else has confirmed as the truth.

Or has the member of staff concerned confirmed that he can identify the exact time when he left his e-mail open and the PA was the only one who had the opportunity to look at it?

You've referred it to HR, who have investigated as per procedures and aren't in a position to take this further.

You need to let this go. Harley is quite correct that you could be rightly accused of bullying if you refuse to let it lie within the appropriate channels.

I never quite get why people think these sorts of threads are too identifiable; considering the population of UK (and we're only assuming UK, may not be!), there will be any number of people who are resigning from their jobs due to ill health, but whose decision to leave is being kept (semi!) confidential

It's not that Adara, it's the fact that the op is so furious about breach of confidence, and yet she is doing the same.

She may say there are no identifying details, but I bet if the PA read it she would recognise the situation.

I just don't get the point of the thread - did she want us all to say "how awful, sack her"?

How do you know she didn't hear it from someone else who saw an opened e-mail? Send very unfair to punish the only person who won't tell/can't remember where she heard it? What about everyone else in the trail? Are they all being punished? Seems like a huge storm in a tea cup to me, and that you should seek to learn from this, instigate a "locked screen" policy and move on.

Yes, I think the PA would probably recognise this...

Storm in a teacup. Hardly market moving information is it? No proof, a lot of suspicion (from the OP) and gossip (from the pa). For once, I have to say HR appear to be the voice of reason and fairness (not something I'm usually keen to admit.)