Data Protection Act
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Data Protection Act
I have just received notice from my company( loco north of England) to say that, in future, reasons for duty changes will not be given in order to comply with the Data Protection Act. Unfortunately, due to insufficient crews and poor rostering, duty changes are all too frequent.
Has anybody out there come across this as a reason for not telling you why your duty has changed?
Has anybody out there come across this as a reason for not telling you why your duty has changed?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like cra@pola to me.
Providing they don't intrude on other peoples privacy by giving personal info about some one else eg "x is drunk / insane / lost his medical so you have to do the trip", I don't see a problem.
Why not make your own data protection enquiry about data on yourself? The reason for the re rostering must be recorded somewhere - and it does not have to be on computer to be covered.
Providing they don't intrude on other peoples privacy by giving personal info about some one else eg "x is drunk / insane / lost his medical so you have to do the trip", I don't see a problem.
Why not make your own data protection enquiry about data on yourself? The reason for the re rostering must be recorded somewhere - and it does not have to be on computer to be covered.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be a standard 'general purpose' excuse used by many organisations and individuals to explain away anything they don't want to / can't be bothered to do.
Recent example:
Pit Bull junior has a nappy laundry service. (The noisy little git is only 5 months old). Last week I got a call that "Due to the data protection act we will not be picking up this week".
Yeah, right.
CPB
Recent example:
Pit Bull junior has a nappy laundry service. (The noisy little git is only 5 months old). Last week I got a call that "Due to the data protection act we will not be picking up this week".
Yeah, right.
CPB
Our lot hide behind the DPA in much the same way, they won't tell you who you are flying with or the reason for changes etc. etc. It seems a good way to cover up incompetence and "favour" based roster changes. I guess it's a matter of how you interpret the act but no one in the union can see any reason for what they are doing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Our mob is very similar ...
They won't tell you what you're doing or who you're doing it with any time before you report for duty, but once you arrive at the crewroom, you have their names, staff numbers, where they've come from, where they're going to ...etc...
Also, we often find that if crewing are after a favour, they'll tell you anything you want !
They won't tell you what you're doing or who you're doing it with any time before you report for duty, but once you arrive at the crewroom, you have their names, staff numbers, where they've come from, where they're going to ...etc...
Also, we often find that if crewing are after a favour, they'll tell you anything you want !
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just received notice from my company( loco north of England) to say that, in future, reasons for duty changes will not be given in order to comply with the Data Protection Act. Unfortunately, due to insufficient crews and poor rostering, duty changes are all too frequent.
(In my experience - of the Canadian and Irish Commissioners - these guys are usually pretty honest, and tend to be hardasses that hate the legislation they're there to implement being used for bullsh*t like this.)
Good luck, and let us know how you got on.
adam
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds more like avoidance of DPA than compliance. From my understanding, you have a right to see any personal data a company has electronically stored about you as an individual. If they are recording their reasons for change to your roster, you therefore have a right to see it. So, if they don't record it, you can't see it.
Not Manchester
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Salford
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dewpoint - Ask your management to tell you, in writing, which of the eight Data Protection Principles would be breached by giving you the reasons for roster changes, and in what way they would be breached.
Data protection forms a considerable part of my professional duties, so I'd be interested to see their reply to that one.....or their reasons for refusing to do so.
Data protection forms a considerable part of my professional duties, so I'd be interested to see their reply to that one.....or their reasons for refusing to do so.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the replies. I am amazed at the lengths management will go to to disguise their incompetence. I can't help thinking that if we carried out our functions to the same low standards , there would be more smouldering hulls than you could shake a stick at.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London & Edinburgh
Age: 38
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dewpoint - from recall memory of studying the act (for IT GCSE in 2000), this is not a valid excuse.
The DPA is there to protect your information being held:
- correctly
- in safe/secure manner
- not given out to people to whom should not have access
Giving you reasons about your job should be given to you unless the data contains personal information about someone else (highly unlikely, from what you have said).
Jordan
The DPA is there to protect your information being held:
- correctly
- in safe/secure manner
- not given out to people to whom should not have access
Giving you reasons about your job should be given to you unless the data contains personal information about someone else (highly unlikely, from what you have said).
Jordan
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nice, FR
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DPA - A Logician's dream!
Sorry to be flipant but the last time I had a problem with this Act was meeting someone at LHR but I did not know if they where flying BA (Term1) or SwissAir (T2).
I went to T1 , explained the problem that I did not know who they were flying with and BA told me they could not tell me if my friend was on the flight. "Why not" , DPA was the response.
So I asked who it covered, and apparently it covers anyone for whom they have the data in the database. I then reasoned as follows:
"If they are on your flight, then you cannot say anything, and I should stay at T1, if they are not on your flight, then the DPA does not apply so you can tell me to go to T2"
She smiled and said "I would go to T2 if I were you".
So, tell me how the DPA prevents me working out (with time), who or who is not on any given flight?
Well intentioned, but just like security, it only stops the folks you do not need to stop!
I went to T1 , explained the problem that I did not know who they were flying with and BA told me they could not tell me if my friend was on the flight. "Why not" , DPA was the response.
So I asked who it covered, and apparently it covers anyone for whom they have the data in the database. I then reasoned as follows:
"If they are on your flight, then you cannot say anything, and I should stay at T1, if they are not on your flight, then the DPA does not apply so you can tell me to go to T2"
She smiled and said "I would go to T2 if I were you".
So, tell me how the DPA prevents me working out (with time), who or who is not on any given flight?
Well intentioned, but just like security, it only stops the folks you do not need to stop!
Too mean to buy a long personal title
I agree about the "logician's dream" bit, but ultimately your reasoning can't get you information from the airline about who is on a flight. You were only able to work out that your friend was on an LX because you had other information that did not come from BA. So even if BA was correct to agree with your interpretation, the only information that they gave you was that your friend was not on their flight. That in itself tells you nothing about which flight he was on or who else was on either airline's flight. You had to know something else to work that out, and that is not BA's responsibility.
I remember the DPA being used as an excuse in the Ian Huntley murder case. North Humberside police were unable to pass details because it infringed the act.
However if you get a parking ticket, your personal information can be obtained from the DVLA. Even private companies can buy the information for a fee.
As always, its just used as an excuse by the incompetent.
However if you get a parking ticket, your personal information can be obtained from the DVLA. Even private companies can buy the information for a fee.
As always, its just used as an excuse by the incompetent.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Out of the blue
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every pilot in your company should write formally to the Data Manager requiring him/her to send all the data that they hold on you as they are required to do by the Act.
That should keep them in pencils for a week or two.
That should keep them in pencils for a week or two.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Data Protection Act 1998
This relates to personal information (even names) for living persons, there are exemptions e.g. lists of names in telephone directories are exempt but sensitive stuff isnt, especially
1/ racial ethnic orifin
2/ political opinion
3/ religious belief
4/ trade union membership
5/ physical mental health
6/ sexual life
7/ offences
8/ court data
If the persons identity is not presented then no breach has occurred.
1/ racial ethnic orifin
2/ political opinion
3/ religious belief
4/ trade union membership
5/ physical mental health
6/ sexual life
7/ offences
8/ court data
If the persons identity is not presented then no breach has occurred.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nice, FR
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree actually, but perhaps we will take it offline if need be.
My point was not that anyone told me that my friend was on swissair, because as far as BA are concerned my friend and the swissair comment could be a complete invention.
The point is that the only reasonable grounds that BA have for refusing to answer my question is if the DPA applies, in which case it confirms that the person is on the flight.
This means that insisting DPA applies means Yes , otherwise No.
Therefore, we have the crazy situation that the only way they can truely protect the information about their passengers is to refuse to confirm or deny anyone being on the plane, even if they are not on it and hence not subject to the DPA.
Conclusion: Refusal to confirm or deny should infact be a company policy that ensures that they comply with the DPA requirements, even though it actually goes beyond the legal requirement.
They may well argue the same w.r.t. this thread's question namely that is not the DPA that prevents them from telling you, but the company policy that has been put in place to ensure compliance with DPA, because the DPA itself is logically incomplete in terms of being able to prevent someone drawing useful inferences.
If the policy is heavy handed and you can propose an alternative approach that still meets the needs, that would seem to me the right approach.
Hopeful back on thead now, sorry for the indulgence.
Sorry folks my previous note was in reply to Globaliser, not the posts directly before.
My point was not that anyone told me that my friend was on swissair, because as far as BA are concerned my friend and the swissair comment could be a complete invention.
The point is that the only reasonable grounds that BA have for refusing to answer my question is if the DPA applies, in which case it confirms that the person is on the flight.
This means that insisting DPA applies means Yes , otherwise No.
Therefore, we have the crazy situation that the only way they can truely protect the information about their passengers is to refuse to confirm or deny anyone being on the plane, even if they are not on it and hence not subject to the DPA.
Conclusion: Refusal to confirm or deny should infact be a company policy that ensures that they comply with the DPA requirements, even though it actually goes beyond the legal requirement.
They may well argue the same w.r.t. this thread's question namely that is not the DPA that prevents them from telling you, but the company policy that has been put in place to ensure compliance with DPA, because the DPA itself is logically incomplete in terms of being able to prevent someone drawing useful inferences.
If the policy is heavy handed and you can propose an alternative approach that still meets the needs, that would seem to me the right approach.
Hopeful back on thead now, sorry for the indulgence.
Sorry folks my previous note was in reply to Globaliser, not the posts directly before.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London & Edinburgh
Age: 38
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saintsman - utter tripe.
The DVLA is bound by legislation to pass on your details. And I think you'll find that information that is bought comes from the Editted Register of the People (Electoral Roll), which is used for elections and can be sold.
Maybe your facts should be checked first?
Jordan
The DVLA is bound by legislation to pass on your details. And I think you'll find that information that is bought comes from the Editted Register of the People (Electoral Roll), which is used for elections and can be sold.
Maybe your facts should be checked first?
Jordan