Should You Keep A Work Grievance Hush, Hush?

TK Maxx (TJX) Assistant Vice President leaks junior employee’s live grievance

A grievance procedure governs disputes or conflicts that may arise in the workplace, caused by the work itself, or between co-workers. It is essential that businesses implement a grievance policy that outlines a fair procedure and emphasises the importance of confidentiality. This will enable employers to resolve concerns in a constructive and fair manner. Workplace grievances are common, but how they are handled makes all the difference. It is the employer’s responsibility to respond promptly, efficiently, and fairly, no matter what the scenario may be. The consequences can affect the productivity of the organization, its culture, and perhaps even the company’s reputation if you fail to do so.

An Assistant Vice President (AVP) at the fashion retailer TK Maxx leaked information about a live grievance of a subordinate employee. The grievance related to an employee who the AVP felt had been underperforming but had raised a grievance following a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). The AVP provided a non-employee of TK Maxx an extensive running commentary on the proceedings during telephone chats about unrelated matters.  The AVP leaked in a telephone call:

that the employee had raised a grievance and was on holiday whilst claiming to be off sick and evidence of the holiday was clear following the “sick” employee’s Facebook posts;

• that the AVP had the better of the evidence as supposed to the employee, and that the employee could not provide the necessary evidence;

• that the employee was attempting to rely on evidence from a family member and a friend at the company who herself was a gossip.  The AVP felt that using a family member as party to the grievance would amount to a conflict of interest, and she had the backing of the HR investigating officer.

• that the employee had only raised the grievance to attempt to seal a settlement agreement and that the company had overpaid the employee;

• the AVP continued the conversation in much the same unrestrained tone, going on to predict that the employee would likely appeal the grievance.  So here we have a senior manager sharing with a member of the public a decision on a likely outcome of a grievance procedure prior to the decision even reaching the employee;

• that the employee was likely receiving advice from a finance team colleague who was privy to the sums TJX had paid out to a number of employees.  It was her view that the finance colleague was probably advising the employee to “hang in there” because “they will pay you”;

The above disclosure although particularly extraordinary is likely to occur at similar large organisations if they fail to maintain regular training around privacy and data protection.  Far too often, privacy and data protection are pages of A4 paper that eventually bear the autograph of an employee at the outset of their employment and sadly then jettisoned from the broader mindset. 

It is reasonable to opine that the AVP, based out of the TJX Watford Headquarters which employs some 3000 staff, may have compromised the integrity of the grievance.  It is only hoped that the employee who is now no longer at the company did not leave the company as a result of such breaches.  This article seeks to shed light on why organisations must seek to maintain the integrity of grievances and keep investigations and data confidential.  Grievances can be a symptom of much larger issues at an organisation and thus should be allowed to run a fair and procedurally proper course so that organisations may consider improvements.

Why does the TK Maxx leak present problems, if ignored?

According to a University of Columbia STUDY employees may be subject to retaliation after raising a grievance.  It found that those that lost the grievance fared better than employees that were successful in their grievance in relation to performance ratings and promotion rates.  Although no inference is drawn by the fact the employee soon after left the company there will undoubtedly be circumstances where such inferences are drawn.  It may be of interest as to whether macro determinants such as leaked grievances place pressure on employees to want to leave a company and whether some managers utilise such tactics in the workplace.

In the TK Maxx scenario, it could be said that the leaking of the grievance was a retaliatory action by the AVP.  What if it was not?!  That’s the point, if the AVP would have refrained from the gossiping, eyebrows are less likely to be raised.  It is a timely moment to quote the old adage “the smarter you get, the less you speak”.

Grievance procedures are difficult for everyone involved, so maintaining confidentiality is vital. This can be a particularly challenging aspect, but it is essential to preserve the integrity of the process.
If confidentiality is breached, it can erode trust and make it difficult to resolve the issue at hand. It can also hinder future cases from being brought forward, as people may be reluctant to come forward if they believe the information will not be kept confidential.

For these reasons, it is critical to respect the importance of confidentiality during grievance procedures. This requires creating a safe and supportive environment where everyone feels comfortable participating. It also means ensuring that all information related to the grievance is handled with care and respect.
Managers and human resource professionals may find it difficult to deal with employee grievances. Inevitably, these discussions involve personal matters for the employee.  In fact, the AVP went on to leak details about the employees mental health including drawing conclusions that the employee’s Partner may have contributed to their mental health difficulties.  Perhaps the AVP seeking to shift the blame from TK Maxx.   Therefore, confidentiality is a significant issue in the grievance process and can pose a number of challenges not least misinformation once a leak has occurred. In many cases, employers are faced with the task of juggling competing obligations to the aggrieved employee, any other employees involved in the complaint, as well as the organisation itself.  

The purpose of this blog is to provide employers with a number of top tips for dealing with confidentiality issues surrounding employee grievances. It also explains the importance of how confidentiality can play an instrumental role when dealing with employee grievances.  TJX UK Ltd is the legal entity that operates the TK Maxx brand in the UK and there is an undoubted public interest that such incidents are brought to the fore to encourage change and protect existing employees at the company from such poor management practices.

For employees, grievance procedures involve issues that may be very personal, while relatively routine for their employers. Therefore, confidentiality becomes even more crucial when grievances are handled. If the person involved is not familiar with the grievance process, it can be challenging.

Top tips for employers:

1. Limit the number of people involved. Ensure that a limited number of people are aware of the grievance. The fewer the participants the better. In this way, confidential information is protected from being inadvertently shared, which can negatively impact morale among employees and employee-employer relationships. If a small number of employees have participated in the grievance process, regardless of the outcome, it will be easier to return to the status quo after the grievance process has concluded. It is easy to understand that this would be increasingly difficult if more employees know about the grievance.

2. Obtain the cooperation of the aggrieved employee. It is necessary to ensure that the employee in question is fully aware of the grievance process. It is also imperative to ensure that you have their interests at heart if confidentiality will be an issue. It is good practice to share with the aggrieved a list of people who need to be aware of the grievance or are involved in it. This should include any specific details they need to know. If the individual is interested, you can invite his or her feedback. If this is addressed upfront, then it is less likely to be a problem later when the employee raises it, and then you will need to justify your actions.

3. Protection of the parties in a grievance. Within a workplace conflict, it can be challenging for all parties involved. There is a high likelihood that witnesses called in grievance cases will be either colleagues or friends of the employee bringing the grievance. Confidentiality in these circumstances is paramount because if the information is leaked, the consequences will be significant and adversely affect the company’s employment relationships and morale.

4. Data protection. Grievance notes and other information may also be accessed through a subject access request or through any subsequent court proceedings. This procedure will enable you to easily determine the amount of information that will be disclosed, and it will be helpful to have a record of any objections made by employees. In addition, there may be a few witnesses who will be asked to provide a statement regarding the grievance case. It is important that witnesses are protected in these cases. Information leaks will have a significant negative effect on the company’s relationships and morale. If confidentiality is broken in a grievance case, it can have a detrimental effect on colleagues’ trust. Witnesses can come forward or be asked to come forward with the intention of remaining anonymous, especially if they have a positive working relationship with the defendant but are familiar with the case.

5. Innocent until proven guilty. Until a person is proven guilty of an offence, the presumption of innocence is applied. It is a legal principle that ensures that every person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty. In cases of work-related disputes, the aggrieved may be innocent and not want their name tarnished. They may wish to resume their job without others knowing about the grievance hearing. In the TK Maxx case, it appears the AVP had already made a strong view of guilt prior to the outcome of the procedure, and was only too happy to furnish a total third party with the granular detail. 

In conclusion, if a grievance case’s confidentiality has been breached and other individuals are aware of the case, it may lead to embarrassment, poor morale within the organisation, and a lack of trust among the employees. It certainly may impact the outcome and perhaps leave the aggrieved employee seeking a reconsideration of the grievance based on leaks to inappropriate parties.

This article is not legal advice and affected employees should seek independent legal advice from an appropriate entity. The lawyers of TK Maxx have been contacted for comment about this article but have declined.

Loopline media

london, willis building, reflection-3529954.jpg

This Article is brought to you by

Loopline Media

Catch up with the Author

Post-Brexit: data protection
Card processor sends sensitive data to wrong address
24 August 2022

Worldline SA subsidiary Payone GmbH has been accused of breaching data protection rules after it sent sensitive employee payroll information to the wrong address by accident. The Worldline Group holdS a 60% stake in the Frankfurt based company who have a small UK market presence.

In June 2021, one of Payone GmbH’s ex UK employees (the data subject) received a “potential data breach notification” from the firm advising him that his salary, National Insurance data, nationality (Special Category Data) was amongst various bits of information sent to an incorrect home address.

This included personal information such as the former employees name, age and address.  It also included details such as the date of birth and the amount of annual work bonus he received in his bank account amongst other identifiable data.

Payone GmbH confirmed that this document was sent out in error following an employee making a mistake when re-entering data processed by their third-party payroll provider.  The error arose when the employee was fulfilling an Article 15 GDPR request. The error was spotted by the data subject when he noticed in an email version of the document that the postal address was incorrect. An attempt to notify Payone GmbH of the error went in vain as the document was already irretrievably despatched.

The data subject was alarmed with the incident which exposed him to the possibility of fraudulent activity, amidst reasonable fears his data could end up on the dark web and used by criminals.  Habitually resident in the UK he complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in June 2021. He similarly raised the concern in Germany via The Hessian Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (HBDI).

The ICO reprimanded Payone GmbH for the error in their final decision letter.
Similarly, the HBDI cited a violation of Article 5(f) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) relating to integrity and confidentiality.

The ICO stated in their July 2021 findings that Payone GmbH, “should take steps to ensure that all personal data records are accurate and up to date. Holding inaccurate information, such as addresses, does increase the risk of personal data breaches and poses risks to the security of information”.

The HBDI confirmed in their October 2021 findings that Payone GmbH had taken remedial action. They concluded that a monetary fine would not be imposed on Payone GmbH as they had taken technical and organisational steps in response to the data breach. Data subjects could now request their data in an autonomous portal.

The GDPR, which came into effect in 2018, gave the Information Commissioner’s Office greater powers to tackle data breaches. The new ‘UK GDPR’ charts its own course after Brexit whilst seeking to maintain EU GDPR adequacy.  In extreme scenarios, organisations face penalties of up to £20m or 4 per cent of their global worldwide turnover, whichever is more.

In the years prior to GDPR, the ICO fines were capped at £500,000.

The data subject said: “I am just glad I spotted it; they were going to resend the document again to another wrong address. Prior to Brexit the process would have been commenced via the ICO who in turn would liaise with the HBDI on the data subjects’ behalf; but I found myself communicating with both authorities separately which was an additional step but in the end was surprisingly
effective. Unfortunately, Payone GmbH again sent my incorrect address to the
Workers Pension Trust in January 2022, and documents yet again went to the wrong address. In my opinion they have not learned from the first time and my complaint is sitting with the ICO yet again”.

The former employee is pursuing a remedy under Article 82 UK GDPR via
the Court’s of England & Wales.

Extraordinary Experiences

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Our Core Values

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

We use cookies to improve user experience and analyse website traffic. By clicking ‘Accept’, you agree to our website’s cookie use as described in our Privacy Policy.