MAINSYSTEMS 
classify communications by their facts and the applicable rules
1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards
In this video we will work through a concrete decision: classify communications by their facts and the applicable rules. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. Triage organises the initial response without replacing investigation. It determines who should assess the case, what information is missing and which measures cannot wait. Intake must remain protected even before a conclusion on the report's legal classification.
A complaint often seeks correction of a service or decision. A whistleblowing report concerns a possible breach. An ethics report may describe a violation of internal rules outside the legal scope of whistleblower protection. These categories can overlap. Initial classification is an organisational tool and should remain open to revision.
Apply the following rule: The private-sector law covers the listed matters, including areas of EU law, tax and social fraud and, since 7 August 2026, restrictive measures. Federal public bodies have a separate integrity-breach regime. Regions and communities have distinct legal frameworks. The applicable level and subject must be identified.
2. Practical Implementation & Procedure
Read the full account and identify the request and alleged facts. Check whether the matter falls within legislation or internal policy. If referral is needed, assess whether sharing is lawful and send only necessary information. Avoid automatically forwarding the entire message to an ordinary department, especially where it reveals identity or contains sensitive material. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.
3. Case Study & Compliance Action
A communication complains about a late invoice payment and adds that someone demanded a personal commission to release it. Treating only the delay as a complaint would miss the most significant allegation. The team separates the matters and defines coordinated routes with appropriate access. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.
The exercise is as follows: How should a communication containing both a commercial complaint and a possible breach be handled? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.
Identify both matters and handle each appropriately without unnecessarily spreading the contents. The possible breach must retain applicable safeguards. Commercial referral can use information limited to what needs resolution.
One mistake to avoid is: classifying a communication solely by its opening sentence or the department mentioned.
Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A report is automatically classified as protected because it contains the word corruption. What check is missing?
Read the facts and apply the national scope, context and conditions for protection. A form label helps organise information but does not determine the legal framework. If the case falls outside the regime, identify an appropriate route without unnecessarily disclosing information.