Ann Cavoukian

The complainant, an occasional teacher, alleged that a municipal school board breached his privacy by collecting and using personal information from a public arbitration decision to terminate his long-term occasional contract and remove him from its occasional teacher list.

The Assistant Commissioner found that while the collection of the information was authorized, the Board failed to provide proper notice of collection.

Furthermore, the Board's use of the information to remove the complainant from the occasional teacher list was not for a consistent purpose, though its use to terminate the specific long-term contract was permissible.

The Board was ordered to implement proper notice and authorization procedures.

The complainant, an applicant for a firefighter position with a municipality, filed a privacy complaint regarding the collection, use, and disclosure of his personal information (race, sex, and social insurance number) on a test answer sheet.

The Assistant Commissioner found that while the initial collection of pre-employment data on the application form was authorized for an employment equity program, the subsequent collection on the test answer sheet was not necessary and violated the Act.

The municipality also failed to provide proper notice of collection, and its use and disclosure of the data to a private testing company in California, including the disclosure of the complainant's SIN, were not in accordance with the Act.

The Assistant Commissioner issued recommendations to ensure future compliance.

The complainant, an employee of the Ministry of Community and Social Services, alleged three privacy breaches.

First, the amount of her WCB award was disclosed to staff.

Second, the award amount was allegedly disclosed improperly during a grievance meeting.

Third, she was allegedly depicted in a derogatory manner in a staff Christmas video after being unsuccessful in a job competition.

The Assistant Commissioner found that the WCB award and the video depiction constituted personal information.

While the exact method of disclosure during the grievance meeting could not be determined, the use of the complainant's personal information in the video violated section 41 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Ministry was ordered to ensure future compliance.

The complainant, a union member, was arrested by the OPP for possession of narcotics.

Before an information was laid, an arresting officer disclosed the arrest and pending charges to the complainant's employer, resulting in the termination of his employment.

The Information and Privacy Commissioner investigated whether this disclosure violated the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Assistant Commissioner concluded that the information was personal information, that the public record exception in section 37 did not apply, and that the disclosure was not in accordance with section 42 of the Act.

The Ministry was directed to ensure future compliance.