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?

"For once, I have to say HR appear to be the voice of reason and fairness (not something I'm usually keen to admit.)"

It can happen!

I think there's a possibility they think the OP is ever so slightly unhinged tbh, if she is coming across to them in a similar manner to how she is here.

maryz the PA won't be on Mumsnet. I am 100% sure of that. However if I tell you why then that will reveal too many details about "her". I have not been stupid enough to put any identifying details in this thread.

The point of this thread was to gauge opinion about whether it is generally thought to be unacceptable in a workplace to snoop, spread confidential information without permission and lie to HR.

Seems that (a) reading someone else's emails is not snooping (b) it's unreasonable to expect anyone reading those emails to know that an email marked "CONFIDENTIAL" should be kept confidential and (c) if you lie then nobody can prove anything and you'll be fine.

Thanks everyone.

You have no idea who is on Mumsnet.

You sound incredibly vindictive

"I have not been stupid enough to put any identifying details in this thread."

But you have been stupid enough to post the situation on a public forum which is read by THOUSANDS of people across the world.

Get a life and stop bullying other PA's.

You seem to be wilfully misreading the responses you have received in this thread. Snooping is wrong. Lying to HR is wrong. Your OP was about sanctions based on a specific scenario, not about the ethics of snooping and lying.

It's not that it's perfectly fine to 'snoop' and read emails etc etc, it's that your reaction is completely OTT in the circumstances you describe.

Wanting someone to be given a final warning before dismissal for talking to someone else about someone leaving is ludicrous tbh, in the circumstances as you describe them.

OP, forgive me if I'm wrong, but reading this has made me wonder if you are the colleague leaving and therefore feel this way?

I left a job through health reasons and I knew full well that although everything should have "private and confidential" - there just aren't any "secrets" at this level in workplaces once more than one person knows something.

If you are the colleague, I can fully see why you feel like this, but if you aren't I would let the matter drop.

Apologies for that barely literate post!

The point of this thread was to gauge opinion about whether it is generally thought to be unacceptable in a workplace to snoop, spread confidential information without permission and lie to HR.

Of course it's not. But you can't prove it so HR's hands are tied. Your thread should actually be titled "Can I get HR to give someone a formal warning for something I cannot prove happened?"

Answers
A) No
B) Yes, if you're happy risking the company being sued for constructive dismissal or somesuch

In her first post, OP asks "Is it really right from an HR perspective that she can't be sanctioned unless she confesses?"

There are nearly four pages of 'yes, that is correct', but I get the sense that OP wasn't actually looking for other opinions.

If the details have been so changed so that no-one would recognise the situation, it's a bit of a pointless thread.

Otherwise, then yes OP is on dodgy grounds re confidentiality.

Ah, so now OP has changed the 'point' of the thread and re-worded things so that people have to agree with her, even if they don't agree with the original post.

Putting the two together, OP is accusing the PA of snooping, of spreading confidential information and lying. Without evidence or witnesses.

That's bullying. Hope that the PA is keeping a record of any unpleasant behaviour towards her from management.

(well, I guess the PA has this thread!)

But it's probably not a PA, it could easily be a junior doctor, or a nursery nurse, or a trainee lawyer

Fwiw, the "PA" displayed a great error in judgement and lack of professionalism when gossiping the news around. Completely in agreement there.

However, as the holders of the news, you 5 should have kept it so tight that no-one had the opportunity to see the result.

You should let this go, the fallout now from the news and the way staff are reacting to that should be the big focus

OP, you're very heavily invested in this one detail - is there another bit that you haven't mentioned? Have you got some personal association to this?

Jessie, I can understand you being so invested if you are the one who is ill, and the "PA" is not on Mumsnet because he is a man. If that is the case, it is an awful situation for you, and I too would want redress. But what you would like (and what seems fair) isn't possible, because of a lack of evidence.

Also, when I said the "PA" may have heard of it outside work, that is entirely possible, even if you think you move in different circles. Twenty five years ago (so no confidentiality issue!), I was talking to my boyfriend's mum, who mentioned that the director where I worked was to be made redundant. Even the director didn't know it at the time. (Luckily, I didn't pass on the gossip.) I later discovered the MD had spoken to someone outside work, and it eventually reached my BF's mum, who knew I worked there. Unless you have proper evidence, you just can't assume who knows and how.

Totally agree with Cretaceous... There's any number of ways it could have spread out of work. For all you know, one of your senior colleagues might be having an affair with the PA's cousin!

If it's you that's ill, then I suggest you put in a grievance, following your company policy, like anybody else. If it's you that's suspected of spreading the gossip, that's horrible too, but harassing staff with only hearsay as evidence doesn't actually make you look any better.

If you're not involved in either of those ways, then try to see that your reaction is disproportionate to the alleged offence. Maybe you're just very upset about your colleague's illness - I do sympathise, but it's no excuse to lash out at junior staff. Maybe you have a vendetta against the PA - be very careful, because if so, your colleagues probably see it written all over you. Either way, you have to accept that HR are right to shelter the PA from your attack.

The issue is with whoever leaked the confidential information - the source should be who you have an issue with, not the PA

If the information was viewed as a breech of data protection it always comes down to who had that information and in what format - if they left a printed email laying around or they'd screen unlocked they are the person responsible for breaching confidentiality - not the person who inadvertently comes across the info

Seems you'd rather blame a more junior member of staff than accept that management messed up

OP while I can well believe you've changed lots of identifying details, I can't share your confidence that it's unrecognisable. For one thing, I know what sector you work in already. You've mentioned it before and I recall your username. That narrows it down. If I know, so will others. I don't remember your location or age but I bet a quick advanced search would show it up. For another, you have no idea who reads MN. The PA concerned may not be part of the usual demographic, but that doesn't mean they don't read it. Even if they don't, they're highly likely to have told someone, regardless of whether they ought to have done. Their mum, their partner, their best friend, their neighbour the employment solicitor, their cousin who used to be in HR, their housemate who works for a trade union. To say nothing of the other people at your work- are you quite sure none of your HR team read here? Or anyone who might feasibly have read any of the emails? If someone I knew had mentioned this situation to me within the past few weeks and I read this post now, lots of bells would ring. I really can't see how you can be certain of non-discovery unless you've changed so very many things that you're not being accurate about the 'meat' of the situation.

So. Tread very carefully, stop digging, listen to HR and learn lessons.

OP, do you think this person is getting away with things because of their gender? If so , that's a different debate.

The source of the leak is not the PA as they were not in the know. They may have received the info from the leak (open email), but not necessarily.

I'm finding it very hard to understand why this is such a concerning issue, to be honest.

Yes, keeping sensitive business matters confidential is important in any company or organisation - but I'm just not sure that a resignation counts as something so sensitive.

What's the real issue? Why are you so emotionally involved in this?

The office sounds absolutely bizarre. A small team if managers going all secret squirrel over a resignation. Using special encryption on emails relating to resignation (but failing to implement a simple locked screens policy). Failing to tell HR about the resignation. Failing to tell HR about individual's serious health problems. An individual suffering from a health issue which is serious enough to cause them to resign, but which is minor enough for them to continue working through an extended period of notice without requiring any adjustments in the workplace (even to cover any interim medical appointments or treatment). Management team conducting a witch hunt in spite of HR advice.
Sounds like they've gone rogue. If they worked for me, I'd be looking to restructure the dept. on the back of the resignation and get them some basic training in managing people.

Maybe the OP is so worried because they know that they were the original source of the information being leaked so trying to cover their back?

It's really annoying, but sometimes investigations into data breaches etc do just come to a dead end. No, it isn't right to snoop / gossip / lie etc, but without proof that any of this occurred, HR really can't do anything specific.

When things like this have happened at our office there has been a general message put round about confidentiality, looking after information (including locking screens, clear desk policy etc ) and a reminder that anyone found to breach these rules could face disciplinary proceedings . That sounds like your best bet for a next step

Presumably the PA won't be floating into OP's dept again!!

That all sounds sensible Closer.

I've just noticed that HR didn't know that this person is leaving.

How does that work? Who have they handed their notice in to?

I have an image of PP being Carrie from 'The Good Wife' - the organisation certainly sounds barmy enough.