Now, it has become a common occurrence where some employers are so bitter when you stop working with them that they vehemently follow you to your next life.
According to the law, this is criminal. Ab initio ad infinitum.
An employer is now finding themselves on the wrong side of the law after rushing to another employer and demanding that their former employee should not be given a new chance.
Picture this.
At your current job, if you are unhappy and decide to leave, but a boss you had “beef” with for whatever reason decides, no… this person should not be shared, and rushes to a rival company in the same line of business to tell them: that one is a live wire, don’t touch.
In December specifically on 19th December 2024 Margaret Nzula lodged a complaint with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, accusing her former employer, UNITED WINNERS DT SACCO, of secretly engaging her potential new employer, SHIRIKA DT SACCO, and feeding them stories about her performance while she was still on probation. The result? Her dismissal.
The Data Commissioner said, aha! There’s something here.
In the ruling, the Commissioner noted that there is serious legal basis under Article 31(c) and (d) of the Constitution of Kenya, which provides every citizen with the right to privacy.
“In consideration whether to issue compensation, this office takes into consideration the fact that the complainant’s rights under section 26b were infringed upon by the first respondent. The first respondent denied the complainant access to her personal data.The complainant prays for compensation for distress suffered and compensation of violation of rights,” the office of the commissioner stated.
Further, the ruling states that UNITED WINNERS DT SACCO contravened the Data Protection Act of 2019, which also guarantees the right to privacy.
This determination now opens the door for a floodgate of similar complaints from Kenyans who may not have been aware of their rights.
Consequently, the ruling also means employers must disclose to you when another employee has been gossiping about you especially if such behaviour injures your reputation.
It furthers states, “The office finds that section 65 of the act provides that a person who suffers damage by reason of a contravention of requirement of the act is entitled to compensation for that damage from the data controller. The section indicates that damage included financial loss and damage not involving financial loss and including distress.”
For Margaret Nzula, whatever was said about her to the new employer cost her greener pastures.
In the determination, the Data Commissioner notes:
“The 1st respondent (UNITED WINNERS DT SACCO) is hereby found liable for infringement of the complainant’s (MARGARET NZULA) rights to access under Section 26(b) of the Act.”
Ms. Nzula is now to be paid KSh 250,000 by her former employer with immediacy or they face an enforcement notice.
Iwe funzo…
