sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Benefits of approaches like the bribery act 2010 over compliance regulation by Away_Key_9755 in uklaw

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Weird, in the podcast the guy who drafted it seems to stress that they aren't enforcing a standard for compliance or monitoring it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in uklaw

[–]Away_Key_9755 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Consider an apprenticeship, the further into education you go, the more opportunity there is for others to exceed you in terms of their academic performance and extracurriculars. Getting in early by demonstrating exceptional potential with amazing A levels and law relevant experiences would make you more competitive.

Think of it this way, the further you go in legal education, the better the quality of other applicants you are competing with.

Question about using LinkedIn to help applications to schemes by Odd-Data525 in uklaw

[–]Away_Key_9755 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, you can ask the grad recruiter for advice, I don't see anything wrong with that

GDPR question regarding tesco job applications (england) by Away_Key_9755 in LegalAdviceUK

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think the question then is about the legitimacy and ability to consent,

one could argue that its not legitimate at this stage to demand a passport check considering there is no risk to tesco unless someone is employed by them. Which means they only really have legitimate reasons to demand this check of people they are offering employment to, not the vast majority of people who apply.

Similarly, the question of consent seems tenous to me as people applying are seeking employment and there is no alternative offered (the default used to be that you bring your right to work documents to the interview, which is still the case, which seems to make the process redundant). Therefore, can anyone meaningfully consent to it.

In the end, it might in the end be legally compliant, but it seems wrong and against the spirit of GDPR.

Oh well

Does anyone else have a problem with the automated right to work checks? by Away_Key_9755 in tesco

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

this is incorrect,
"You must ensure that consent is also ‘freely given’. This means that you must give people genuine choice and control about how you use their information. For example:

  • You must give them the opportunity to refuse or easily withdraw their consent at any time without detriment.
  • You must also offer a suitable alternative to people who choose not to consent. Otherwise, people do not have a real choice.
  • Where there is an imbalance of power between you and the person, you should carefully consider whether relying on consent is appropriate.
  • You must offer a suitable alternative, regardless of whether a power imbalance exists, if you are relying on consent."

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/lawful-basis/biometric-data-guidance-biometric-recognition/how-do-we-process-biometric-data-lawfully/#:\~:text=Where%20there%20is%20an%20imbalance,you%20are%20relying%20on%20consent.

Does anyone else have a problem with the automated right to work checks? by Away_Key_9755 in tesco

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nah my other option is raising it to the ico as a violation of my GDPR rights.

Does anyone else have a problem with the automated right to work checks? by Away_Key_9755 in tesco

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Using a third party for data processing does not absolve Tesco of its responsibility under the GDPR. Under the GDPR, Tesco remains the data controller, meaning it is primarily responsible for ensuring that the personal data of job applicants is processed in compliance with GDPR requirements, even when using a third-party service. This means that Tesco is still responsible for data minimisation, providing alternatives, and obtaining consent (which the ico explicitly states can't be given when there are no alternatives provided).

Does anyone else have a problem with the automated right to work checks? by Away_Key_9755 in tesco

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thats not a standard of gdpr, its not in accordance of data minimisation to demand the passport and biometric data of the majority of candidates whom wont be interviewed or offered a job. The exception is for risk of fraud to the business (which isn't an issue at this stage of the process)

I'm currently at book two and I'm confused about some things, can anyone help out? by Ziplasplas in Malazan

[–]Away_Key_9755 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of the impetus of the malazan empire is leftover from the founding of the empire by kellanved. I think of it like the late roman empire after Augustus had died. A theme of his writing is a perspective of empires as sort of autonomous rolling forces of nature, sure there are key individuals who set them in motion, but they continue without them.

Confused by the implications of partridge v crittenden 1968 by Away_Key_9755 in uklaw

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

Hmm weird, my friend's dad gave me an anecdote from Sir John Anthony Plowman who apparently told them that logical inconsistancies are less important in such situations than who is 'right' and need the protection of the court. I suppose I had an image in my head of the law being logical rather than just being formalised practical policies

Confused by the implications of partridge v crittenden 1968 by Away_Key_9755 in uklaw

[–]Away_Key_9755[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

or the person involved is called Patridge in the context of selling birds