GDPR encounter, unbelievable!

StriderX · 6 Mar 2019 at 15:20

I’m more than happy with gdpr, it might be a nightmare, but it’s worth it.

Kinda like how going to the shops is a nightmare, but you don’t want to starve to death.

Dave M · 6 Mar 2019 at 16:45

The_Abyss said:
For the UK this is not GDPR - it is the Data Protection Act 2018, as this enacted GDPR into UK law.

If a UK site or organisation is talking about GDPR in anything other than layman terminology to help a person understand then there's a question as to the accuracy of their interpretation of the law.

Not really, the GDPR is an EU regulation, not a directive.

See EU directive vs Regulation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_(European_Union)

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protection-act-2018/

The GDPR has direct effect across all EU member states and has already been passed. This means organisations will still have to comply with this regulation and we will still have to look to the GDPR for most legal obligations. However, the GDPR gives member states limited opportunities to make provisions for how it applies in their country. One element of the DPA 2018 is the details of these. It is therefore important the GDPR and the DPA 2018 are read side by side.

Pawnless Endgame · 6 Mar 2019 at 20:11

mrbell1984 said:
I Didn't even realize there was DPA2018 and GDPR was only a part of it! - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/12/contents/enacted

wow! Some bedtime reading.

Last time I took my Information Governance refresher, it was DPA1998. Does DPA2018 override 1998?

Meridian · 6 Mar 2019 at 20:45

kindai said:
GDPR in principal and what it aims to achieve is good, the way they went about implementing it was shambolic.

No, the implimentation is fine. It's the atempts of various companies to get around it by almost forcing you to accept every cookie which is the problem.

kindai · 6 Mar 2019 at 21:24

Meridian said:
No, the implimentation is fine. It's the atempts of various companies to get around it by almost forcing you to accept every cookie which is the problem.

canttellifserious.gif

Raumarik · 6 Mar 2019 at 21:49

Pawnless Endgame said:
Last time I took my Information Governance refresher, it was DPA1998. Does DPA2018 override 1998?

Yes it replaces it, one of the weirder changes I've noticed is that if you apply for a job and get a bad reference you have no legal entitlement to see it unless you go to the person who gave the bad reference. We've had a few people ask to see references and we've had to tell them to go back to the referee.

Pawnless Endgame · 6 Mar 2019 at 22:01

Raumarik said:
Yes it replaces it, one of the weirder changes I've noticed is that if you apply for a job and get a bad reference you have no legal entitlement to see it unless you go to the person who gave the bad reference. We've had a few people ask to see references and we've had to tell them to go back to the referee.

Thanks for the heads up.

With job recruiting and job hunting these days, this sounds a right nightmare for both the employers and the would-be employees. Nobody's a winner!

Raumarik · 6 Mar 2019 at 22:02

It is, I got my knuckles wrapped for giving out a reference

esoteric said:
Just had a GDPR encounter I couldn't believe. I have a HTC U11 and use Blinkfeed which pulls news articles from all over the place, one I attempted to read had the GDPR gate so I deselect everything and continue. I'm then told I have to visit a selection of links to opt out, it was a big list so I counted them... 40 bloody links to opt out of advertising cookies, wtf?

It's not meant to be onerous but until someone is hit with a penalty it'll keep happening. My record so far is 120 tick boxes on an iPhone SE just for one website. They had a "select all" box but it was greyed out..

Rainmaker · 6 Mar 2019 at 22:47

Has anyone else come across websites that give you the aforementioned 'choices' box, but only 'Accept all' works? I've found many will let you disable all non-essential cookies (eg analytics, whatever) but then refuse to work when you click done/continue. Only the 'Accept all' button works. Sneaky. I take that as a sign to leave the site and use a different one.

Angilion · 6 Mar 2019 at 22:50

esoteric said:
Just had a GDPR encounter I couldn't believe. I have a HTC U11 and use Blinkfeed which pulls news articles from all over the place, one I attempted to read had the GDPR gate so I deselect everything and continue. I'm then told I have to visit a selection of links to opt out, it was a big list so I counted them... 40 bloody links to opt out of advertising cookies, wtf?

Oath is about the same. Dozens of links and each one requires you to deselect numerous options individually. Also, each one is extremely slow, so slow that I'm sure it's deliberate.

Given that many businesses exist primarily to harvest data from people and almost all business do so even if they never use the data, it's not surprising that they would make opting out as inconvenient as possible so they can evade the law as much as possible while technically complying with it. After 15 minutes of deslecting options, almost anyone will give in and "consent" to be harvested for data.

I just obscure myself as much as is reasonably practical - no cookies that persist between sessions, all cookies self-destruct in 30s except those I whitelist, that sort of thing. Although they probably track me with browser fingerprinting anyway.

Tone1979 · 7 Mar 2019 at 09:29

mrbell1984 said:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-about-cookies/

Thanks!

Meridian · 7 Mar 2019 at 20:51

kindai said:
canttellifserious.gif

Extremely serious. It would not be hard for a company to just put: "yes/no" on their website. But to keep the advertising money rolling in they need you to say "Yes". Which is why agreeing is easy and takes a single click, but saying no can take (on some sites) nearly a hundred clicks. This is nothing to do with the GDPR, or the implimentation. It is companies trying to force users down the prefered track. Why on earth would you think I wasn't serious about this?

idi banashapan · 9 Mar 2019 at 21:35

Hades said:
If I come across a site like that I just close the site and move on to a different one. I think they do it to make it inconvenient, hoping most people will just give up and click accept.

exactly this. it's a common practice for an awful lot of sites now.

SexyGreyFox · 10 Mar 2019 at 00:56

Raumarik said:
Yes it replaces it, one of the weirder changes I've noticed is that if you apply for a job and get a bad reference you have no legal entitlement to see it unless you go to the person who gave the bad reference. We've had a few people ask to see references and we've had to tell them to go back to the referee.

I was going to start a thread about this two weeks ago.
My mate works at a company, hates the dept he's in so applied for another dept and he was given the job depending on references.
The stupid bugger then gave his notice in because he was sure he wouldn't have a problem.
The Manager of the new job rang him and told him because of a bad reference she couldn't employ him and now he's without a job.
He contacted his HR 3 times but they said they can't tell him what's on the bad reference or who gave it and the Manager of the job he was hoping to get doesn't know either just that she was told not to employ him :eek:

I thought this was complete BS until I asked my boss who is an employment law expert who goes to tribunals a lot and he confirmed it.

Deleted member 77746 · 10 Mar 2019 at 08:06

SexyGreyFox said:
The Manager of the new job rang him and told him because of a bad reference she couldn't employ him and now he's without a job.
He contacted his HR 3 times but they said they can't tell him what's on the bad reference or who gave it and the Manager of the job he was hoping to get doesn't know either just that she was told not to employ him

I'm confused, shouldn't your mate have told them who the references where? If this is the case surely the employers have a upper hand and can lie to the person applying for a job if they don't like them they can just bin them by this one get out clause?

This clicks clicky crap is making websites a mess. Can't enter a site now without crappy popups or information you need to read before actually getting to the content.

Yaayuh! · 10 Mar 2019 at 08:16

Meridian said:
No, the implimentation is fine. It's the atempts of various companies to get around it by almost forcing you to accept every cookie which is the problem.

Indeed.
They almost always have an “accept all” button but rarely a “decline all”.

Deleted member 77746 · 10 Mar 2019 at 08:30

Meridian said:
Extremely serious. It would not be hard for a company to just put: "yes/no" on their website. But to keep the advertising money rolling in they need you to say "Yes". Which is why agreeing is easy and takes a single click, but saying no can take (on some sites) nearly a hundred clicks. This is nothing to do with the GDPR, or the implimentation. It is companies trying to force users down the prefered track. Why on earth would you think I wasn't serious about this?

Another trick used to eat up consumers just like the discussion about digital ads. This method of forcing people into a corner is making the web unbearable. It's crap trickery to force users into a corner! I am 100% against these snide tactics.

Raumarik · 10 Mar 2019 at 08:50

SexyGreyFox said:
I was going to start a thread about this two weeks ago.
My mate works at a company, hates the dept he's in so applied for another dept and he was given the job depending on references.
The stupid bugger then gave his notice in because he was sure he wouldn't have a problem.
The Manager of the new job rang him and told him because of a bad reference she couldn't employ him and now he's without a job.
He contacted his HR 3 times but they said they can't tell him what's on the bad reference or who gave it and the Manager of the job he was hoping to get doesn't know either just that she was told not to employ him
I thought this was complete BS until I asked my boss who is an employment law expert who goes to tribunals a lot and he confirmed it.

I honestly don't see the point behind it, if you've agreed to give a reference then tbh you should be happy for it to be shared otherwise I see this as a way for HR to ensure buddies get jobs.. since there is effectively no come back.

SexyGreyFox · 10 Mar 2019 at 10:58

mrbell1984 said:
I'm confused, shouldn't your mate have told them who the references where? If this is the case surely the employers have a upper hand and can lie to the person applying for a job if they don't like them they can just bin them by this one get out clause?

I'm more confused and really hope I've heard it all wrong but I've just witnessed it.
If I applied for a job and this came back to me I would spiral right down into my depression if I couldn't find out what has been said.
Like Raumarik said, if you are willing to say something about an employee then you should be made to stand by it.

There is good news for him, one of his friends owns a small company and their driver was retiring.
He's been doing the job for a week, loves it and now they've offered it him full time.

Deleted member 77746 · 10 Mar 2019 at 12:00

@SexyGreyFox

That's good news. I don't think they can withhold reference details mind, I think they talking rubbish.

https://www.reading.ac.uk/internal/...Writingreferences/imps-d-p-references-dp.aspx

Access rights to references
Under the Data Protection Act there are different rights of access to references for the author and the subject. The writer of a reference has no legal obligation to disclose the contents of a reference if the subject makes a subject access request. However, the recipient of the reference may disclose, even if the reference was given in confidence. For this reason, it is best to assume that any reference you write will be accessible by the subject and, therefore, do not write anything that you would not be happy for the subject to see. Where practicable you should show the reference you write to the subject before you send it. It is also good practice to check the reference with another colleague who has had dealings with the subject.

GDPR encounter, unbelievable!

Sgarrista