After An Investigation At Work (Nhs) Which Was Recorded, I Was Sent A Transcript To Read And Sign

[keeney1304]

I have asked for a audio copy of the investigation to check certain details which I have read, this has been refused around GDPR concerns? Where do I stand in getting an audio copy?
This investigation was between myself, and HR representative and the investigating officer, can they (NHS) refuse me an audio copy?

[Mozz71]

If they have an audio copy, I'm fairly sure they have to give you access to it. Anything can be written down.

[woofgang]

No they do not. The transcript they have given you is the "official" copy. If its incorrect or things are missing then you are entitled to request additions to the transcript before you sign it. Anything that has been collected in the way of investigation, whether written or otherwise recorded does not have to be handed over. been there done that on both ends of the disciplinary process.

[Peter Pedant]

I must do this quick. Not much in AB over the month is of interest or makes sense. You have asked how to correct a script you don’t agree with,
And whether you can ask for a recording you know exists.

This answer is in bits and disagree pretty radically with woofie with whom I get on – so it is probably mistaken understanding.

The NHS is definitely covered by the data protection acts which enact domestically the most recent GDPR. By and large the new act enlarges and does not diminish your previous rights. You may not have accessed the correct office to get the recording – the Data Protection Registrar and or office of your hospital. It has to have one. straightforwardly – “data access request act - can I please have a copy of such and such recording which was made of me and is therefore my data within the statutory limit set out by the act.”

As for the script for investigation – you could say: I do not agree with the following statements
and or would like the recording checked:
1) Miss Jane Smyth was in fact Miss Jane Brown
2) That date on p x was 21st and not 22nd And so on down the list

You also need to decide on the importance of the changes
‘I was dressing “an appendix” rather than an “appendix operation scar” ‘ may not merit quarrelling. ‘I was dispensing “paracetamol” rather than “morphine” ‘ may well do if the inquiry is about numbers present and who checked what. Dates of course may be radical if you are going to say you were there or not. But even then, attendance records would settle the matter rather than a recording.

Finally I think you need help – you should have a union rep on board and if you are not unionised then a co-worker who will assist. The ‘conviction’ rates are much lower ( around 20% lower) if there is a helper present, assisting (ACAS stats)

When someone ( woofie or me or whomever) says o yes I tried that and it didn’t work – then check. The hospital I worked at and was union rep – (a)wasn’t aware in various cases, they couldn’t run two disciplinary codes at the same time and not be sure which one they were applying. (b)If a document had my name on it I could claim it as my data. (c)They weren’t allowed to record calls and not warn people. They were unsure (= had no idea) how to handle (d) hearsay. (e)Didn’t know who arranged witnesses although their code clearly said they did. (f)Thought they could question the union rep employee on the advice he had given ( wh is why I got involved). (g)They didn’t understand that if I lodged a document by 5 pm then they couldnt say I hadn’t – because a secretary had said she wanted ten copies because she wasn’t going to copy them.
[One code at a time, yes it was my data, no recording for a variety of reasons, hearsay is difficult and technical, they arranged witnesses because they were the employer and could grant time out, no they cant question someone who have given legal advice, and yes lodged is lodged)

So as you can see, the cases I got involved in ten years ago were A Lot of Fun. How they cheered when I retired

Good luck and don’t forget their targets are different to yours ( someone must get the blame so long as it is not them).f they

Short for this longish post is: NHS HR depts are full of useless winkers who cant get a jjob elsewhere and the main lesson is if they say no – you will find the answer is probably yes.

[woofgang]

well I absolutely agree with you about HR departments PP. Hope you are feeling better

[keeney1304]

Thank you Peter great advice, I have contacted the IG dept and they are not very happy with how I have been treated so far, they have contacted the ICO who have said I should have a copy, obviously HR are not happy , I have put in a complaint to the ICO about my refusals, so await there advice.
What has annoyed me the most is that the investigation is based on hearsay with no proof and they have 1 issue from 4 and a half years ago that they are trying to get me on, the majority of it is from persons who have worked with me about 5 years ago who no longer work with me!!

[Peter Pedant]

//I have contacted the IT dept and they are not very happy with how I have been treated so far, they have contacted the ICO who have said I should have a copy, obviously HR are not happy , //

Good, that should cheer you up – IT should have known anyway.
When someone else says HR is not happy remember to rejoin ‘my job here is not to make HR happy – it anything they ARE here to make me happy.’

//I have put in a complaint to the ICO about my refusals, so await there advice.//
Don’t hold your breath – HR will snap to the ICO – “we’ve done it!” and the ICO ( quite rightly ) will lose interest

//What has annoyed me the most is that the investigation is based on hearsay with no proof //
Erm – yes – no – I think the proof would be hearsay …. BUT
Yes it is admissible under the act – Hearsay Act – but its use in civil courts and NHS disciplinary is complex. Your helper has to make out a case that it is not of probative value, and there degrees of separation are too many to rely on ( Mrs X told the Cleaner who told her inlaws ( all of them ) and they ….) – so overall it fails on the balance of probability test.
I was very keen on the idea of facing the witnesses and being able to question them on detail – and if I couldn’t then the case should fail – Also admitting a letter without the writer meant that the defence ( accused workers helpers) had to refute evidence whereas the job of the employer was to prove evidence. And to turn it around like that was unfair.
I really felt I didn’t do justice to these points on the day

// they have 1 issue from 4 and a half years ago that they are trying to get me on, the majority of it is from persons who have worked with me about 5 years ago who no longer work with me!!//
The points you should make are: they are not allowed to keep black diaries and these things should have been settled 4 years ago and not put on the back boiler. And it is unfair to you ( yup agtain, ter daaah!) that there evidence was at the time and yours was 4 y later. If they DID proceed on it then you should plead res judicata (its been heard and settled) and to rake it up again is unfair (ter daah!). That is you say that if there is a complaint and incident then it is investigated and dealt with within a short time and not backed up and recorded in a little book.
And finally I said that the data they were relying on had been collected for another purpose, and should have been deleted as its use had run out and therefore was inadmissible – IT agreed. There is a time out for data and I cant recollect what it is. If the data is timed out – they cant use it. I think I pleaded they couldn’t use it beyond the purpose for which it was collected, because to do otherwise is against the law and also unfair – ter daaah !.
The HR will hit back and say various acts and laws don’t apply to an employer, And you basically say that the NHS is big enough that they do. Or depending on the act etc, that there are certain acts that they don’t have to follow, but this isn’t one of them ….. gets quite technical. My trust tried to exclude all equity(trust) law at one point to get around a point about A giving money to B for a purpose C which didn’t suit them for that case. (And I of course was bleating that is was unfair)
Do you want me to come down and give them hell on your part?
There are some technical points here and you really really need local help from a union rep or someone such as woofie or myself who used to do and don’t now.
Good luck PP

[keeney1304]

Great Advice Peter, I'd love you to help me but they would refuse as they say you are not from the hospital or a colleague.
A colleague who accompanies me is not allowed to speak or ask questions, just there as my support, so I wait their outcome, again thanks for making things a bit clearer :)