Reply to: Reprisal fears?

[TheDogsNads]

So the OP is just engaging in 'What if-ery'?!

[David71]

Can't be bothered to read the entire thread, but I've just taken out a Professional Standards complaint against my local police force which has me thinking about potential knock-on with contracts as policing is the area most of my contracts has been over the last few years.

Current force is my local one (last time I worked for them was as a permie consultant years ago) but the complaint I've made could, if my local force play serious hardball, have a (negative but non-criminal) effect on my PNC record.

But hay....lets go for it. IOPC next step if I feel 'victimised' because of my complaint

[northernladuk]

No particular aim, but I enjoy challenging my own perspective on things. Just because I disagree, doesn't mean I'm clueless - and why in particular do you think you might understand this stuff better than I? Unless we know each other???

It certainly sounds like it when you've been told the same thing by every single person in this thread and you are still banging on about it. We see this alot so we've a pretty dim opinion of the people when they do it.

It will end by the thread getting locked as you've had your answer, you haven't listened and carried on to the point the thread is no longer useful and get's locked, which, hy the way it has so could a mod do the needful?

[andymalory]

And if a similar job appeared on a job site, with a rate against it, is that not going to be a hint as to roughly what their pay is?

Me: Eek works as a window cleaner in Canary Wharf, I wonder how much he gets paid?
Advert: We are hiring window cleaners for £45-55 per hour working in Canary Wharf
Me: Well, that was easier to find out than having to stalk him, trawl through to some obscure government webpage, search by the name of the company he was working for, then scroll down to see if I can find him and then read through documents to see if he's ever had a tribunal against them where he didn't understand what he was doing.

Fair point - but not all roles/salaries are as visible as others.

[andymalory]

It’s the choice you take - the final judgement of a tribunal is public which means if you want the money the figures need to be explicitly spelled out.

and again I see another post where I wonder exactly what you real aim is on here because you really seem to be clueless and unwilling to listen to those who actually understand this stuff

No particular aim, but I enjoy challenging my own perspective on things. Just because I disagree, doesn't mean I'm clueless - and why in particular do you think you might understand this stuff better than I? Unless we know each other???

[WTFH]

This is where we differ. I'm not convinced many people would be happy with their pay being known by others unless they specifically choose the people to disclose this to.

And if a similar job appeared on a job site, with a rate against it, is that not going to be a hint as to roughly what their pay is?

Me: Eek works as a window cleaner in Canary Wharf, I wonder how much he gets paid?
Advert: We are hiring window cleaners for £45-55 per hour working in Canary Wharf
Me: Well, that was easier to find out than having to stalk him, trawl through to some obscure government webpage, search by the name of the company he was working for, then scroll down to see if I can find him and then read through documents to see if he's ever had a tribunal against them where he didn't understand what he was doing.

[eek]

This is where we differ. I'm not convinced many people would be happy with their pay being known by others unless they specifically choose the people to disclose this to.

It’s the choice you take - the final judgement of a tribunal is public which means if you want the money the figures need to be explicitly spelled out.

and again I see another post where I wonder exactly what you real aim is on here because you really seem to be clueless and unwilling to listen to those who actually understand this stuff

[andymalory]

I don’t see any problem with anyone seeing my day rate (it’s the going rate for my skill set with 20+ years of expertise).

This is where we differ. I'm not convinced many people would be happy with their pay being known by others unless they specifically choose the people to disclose this to.

[SueEllen]

I agree with ensuring you have a strong case before even starting. But again, the point I'm trying to get over is that some may be deterred from bringing a case to the ET regardless of its merits, because of fears of reprisal or just generally don't like being in the public domain.

It's actually more negative for the company.

For example if you pursued a company for something like unlawful deduction of wages, then anyone who did a search for them on that website saw the information and then had dealings with the company would be careful to ensure that they got paid/their wages from them.

[eek]

It all depends on how the rate was agreed and whether it was made clear that there was a difference between the agreed rate and actual wage. Sometimes that is made clear, sometimes not.

Regardless, the principle of having your day rate made visible on Gov.uk is not ideal, is it? How many contractors would be put off my having this in the public domain?

No it doesn’t - a clueful person using an umbrella firm would be deemed to know how payments work unless the agency documentation was an outright lie.

Im seriously at a loss as to what you are trying to do here as your second paragraph makes no sense - I don’t see any problem with anyone seeing my day rate (it’s the going rate for my skill set with 20+ years of expertise).

[WTFH]

Now, anyone can find it with very little effort.

Easier, or less easy than finding out company information?

And then the question is: why would anyone spend all their effort trying to find out if you have, or have not, used an ET to resolve a situation? Is it the whole population of the UK, or all those people you read about in the papers, or is it just a scenario you've dreamt up?

If I have an actual case (not hypothetical) and I have exhausted all other options, and the amount of money being withheld was enough to make it worth my effort, and the risk of losing was low, and I had sought professional advice, then I would go for it.
But now you've shifted your fear from "fear of reprisals", which you seem too afraid to tell us what these reprisals might be, to "fear of someone stalking you and finding out what you earned at a point of time in the past"

The internet is not full of stalkers, reading your every post on Facebook, Tinder, Grinder, TikTok, Twitter, Mastodon, Instagram, etc etc who then go off and search companies house and every other government website to find out whether you earned £100 a day or £105.
They don't care about you. You are insignificant. Get used to it.

[northernladuk]

That would be great, but probably a step too far. I'm raising the question to see how many others would have a problem with this, and perhaps might not seek justice because of the way things are published. Before 2017 this was less of an issue, as you'd have to go somewhere physical to see the judgement details. Now, anyone can find it with very little effort.

For an unlawful deduction of wages claim, I'm not sure the same steadfast commitment to 'open justice' is served by having everything published. For discrimination and other cases, it'll be a different matter entirely.

I must admit I can't help you need to take off your silver foil hat. I very much doubt many people will be put off pursuing a valid claim that is likely to result in a compensation payment just because it's hidden away somewhere on a website that realistically that next to no one will ever go digging.

So IMO the answer is no, a vast majority of people will not be in the slightest phased that details will be published in a far corner of the web.

[andymalory]

What are you hoping to achieve?
Are you wanting to launch a legal challenge against the government to stop them showing the results of tribunals?

That would be great, but probably a step too far. I'm raising the question to see how many others would have a problem with this, and perhaps might not seek justice because of the way things are published. Before 2017 this was less of an issue, as you'd have to go somewhere physical to see the judgement details. Now, anyone can find it with very little effort.

For an unlawful deduction of wages claim, I'm not sure the same steadfast commitment to 'open justice' is served by having everything published. For discrimination and other cases, it'll be a different matter entirely.

[andymalory]

What exactly are you worried about?

If you believe you've got a strong case, preferrably with relevant examples of cases that went in your favour then I'd say start the process. Vast numbers of claims never make it to court. If it's anything like small claims you'll be required to go through mediation before it goes the whole way anyway so might resolve it there. That way you get most of what you wanted and it never makes it to a judgement.

Problem is what do you think they've done wrong? In nearly every single thread we've had where a contractor wants to sue someone they are just reaching and never had a case when we've pulled it apart. It's usually the first thing people want to do when they are pissed off and feel it's 'unfair' so they threaten to sue. When the details emerge there is no case.

I'd focus on what it is you think they've done wrong, get some legal advice and then where there is a real case start thinking about ET.

I agree with ensuring you have a strong case before even starting. But again, the point I'm trying to get over is that some may be deterred from bringing a case to the ET regardless of its merits, because of fears of reprisal or just generally don't like being in the public domain.

[WTFH]

How many contractors would be put off my having this in the public domain?

What are you hoping to achieve?
Are you wanting to launch a legal challenge against the government to stop them showing the results of tribunals?