Employment and Labour Law

The appellant, representing the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (O.P.S.E.U.), appealed the Ministry of the Attorney General's decision to deny access to position specifications for essential service positions during a 1996 strike.

The Ministry claimed the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Assistant Commissioner found that the records were currently being used by the Ministry in relation to ongoing labour relations negotiations.

Consequently, the records fell within the scope of section 65(6)2 and were excluded from the Act.

The Ministry's decision was upheld.

The appellant, an unsuccessful candidate for a Legal Counsel position, requested access to job competition records, including interview questions, model answers, and interviewers' notes.

The Ministry of the Attorney General denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6)3 as employment-related matters in which the Ministry had an interest.

The Assistant Commissioner found that while the records related to an employment matter, the Ministry no longer had a legal interest in the completed competition that could affect its legal rights or obligations.

The records were therefore subject to the Act.

The Ministry was ordered to issue an access decision and conduct a further search for additional responsive records.

The appellant, a former teacher, appealed the Peel District School Board's decision to deny access to records relating to his employment and dismissal.

The Board claimed the records were excluded from the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 52(3)3.

The Adjudicator found that the records were collected and maintained in relation to meetings and communications about the appellant's suitability for employment, an employment-related matter in which the Board has a legal interest.

The appeal was dismissed and the Board's decision to deny access was upheld.

The appellant requested access to the examination and scoring method used for the position of Fire Prevention Inspector from the City of Vaughan.

The City denied access under section 11(h) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

During the appeal, it was revealed that grievances had been filed regarding the hiring process.

The Adjudicator found that the record was maintained and would be used by the City in relation to ongoing grievance arbitrations, which are proceedings relating to labour relations.

Consequently, the record fell within the jurisdictional exclusion in section 52(3)1 of the Act, and the appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, an employee of the Ministry of the Attorney General, requested access to notes made by evaluators during her performance appraisal.

The Ministry denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Act under section 65(6)3 as employment-related matters in which the Ministry had an interest.

The Assistant Commissioner found that the Ministry did not have a legal interest capable of affecting its rights or obligations, as the time to grieve the appraisal had expired.

The Assistant Commissioner also found the Ministry's search for records unreasonable because it failed to look for recreated notes after the originals were improperly destroyed, and ordered a further search.

An employee appealed the Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services' decision to deny access to a grievance report and duty roster sheets.

The Ministry claimed the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under the labour relations exclusion.

The adjudicator found that the records were collected, maintained, and used by the Ministry in relation to proceedings before the Grievance Settlement Board, which relate to labour relations.

The appeal was dismissed and the Ministry's decision was upheld.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Ontario Labour Relations Board denying access to records relating to the appellant's employment with the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board.

The OLRB claimed the records were excluded under section 65(6) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Adjudicator found that records sent by or to the municipal employer were excluded from the Act, extending the definition of 'institution' in section 65(6) to include municipal institutions to avoid an absurd result.

The OLRB was ordered to issue an access decision for the remaining records.

The appellant, a former employee, requested access to all of her personnel and grievance-related records from the Ministry of Community and Social Services dating back to 1981.

The Ministry denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Inquiry Officer found that the records were collected, maintained, and used by the Ministry in relation to proceedings before the Grievance Settlement Board and the Ontario Human Rights Commission, which relate to labour relations.

Consequently, the records were excluded from the scope of the Act under section 65(6)1, and the Ministry's decision was upheld.

The appellant submitted a freedom of information request to the Ministry of Natural Resources for records relating to his work-related back injury, Workers' Compensation Board claim, and re-employment.

The Ministry denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6) as employment-related records.

The Information and Privacy Commissioner upheld the Ministry's decision, finding that the records were collected or prepared in relation to employment-related matters in which the Ministry had an interest, and none of the exceptions in section 65(7) applied.

The appellant, a former employee, appealed the Ministry of the Environment's decision to deny access to records regarding the status of various positions and vacancies within the Standards Development Branch.

The Ministry claimed the records were excluded from the Act under section 65(6)3.

The Inquiry Officer found that the records, which included organizational charts used for downsizing and program planning, were collected, prepared, maintained, or used in relation to meetings, consultations, discussions, or communications about labour relations or employment-related matters in which the Ministry had an interest.

The appeal was dismissed as the records fell outside the scope of the Act.

The requester appealed the Ministry of Health's decision to deny access to records relating to a complaint filed against him as an employee of the Emergency Health Services.

The Ministry claimed the records fell outside the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6)3.

The Inquiry Officer found that the records were collected in relation to employment-related matters in which the Ministry had an interest.

The appeal was dismissed and the Ministry's decision was upheld.

The appellant appealed the Ministry of Labour's decision to deny access to records concerning an employment standards claim filed against the appellant.

The Ministry claimed the invasion of privacy exemption under section 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Inquiry Officer found that the records contained personal information compiled as part of an investigation into a possible violation of law, and that disclosure would constitute a presumed unjustified invasion of personal privacy under section 21(3)(b).

The Ministry's decision was upheld.

The appellant, representing a bargaining agent, requested access to lists containing the classifications of all Ministry of the Attorney General employees by compensation group.

The Ministry denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Inquiry Officer found that the records were collected or prepared in relation to labour relations and employment-related matters in which the Ministry has a legal interest, specifically regarding its obligations under the Public Service Act and in the context of collective bargaining.

The appeal was dismissed as the records fell outside the scope of the Act.

The appellant submitted a freedom of information request to the Management Board Secretariat for a report investigating her management style.

The institution denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Information and Privacy Commissioner found that the records were prepared in relation to employment-related matters in which the institution had an interest, specifically its obligation to provide a safe workplace and address performance issues.

The decision to deny access was upheld as the records fell outside the scope of the Act.

The appellant, a member of the Ontario Provincial Police, requested access to his personnel records, Professional Standards Bureau records, Workers' Compensation Board records, and Long Term Disability records.

The Ministry denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Act under sections 65(6)1 and 3.

The Inquiry Officer found that the WCB and disciplinary records were excluded under section 65(6)1 as they related to proceedings.

However, the personnel and LTD records were not excluded under either section 65(6)1 or 3, as they were not maintained in relation to proceedings or meetings in which the Ministry had a legal interest.

The Ministry was ordered to issue an access decision for the personnel and LTD records.

The appellant appealed the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing's decision to deny access to records relating to a Workplace Discrimination and Harassment Prevention (WDHP) complaint made against the appellant.

The Ministry claimed the records were excluded from the scope of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6)3.

The Inquiry Officer found that the records were collected in relation to employment-related matters in which the Ministry has an interest, specifically potential liability under the Human Rights Code.

The appeal was dismissed and the Ministry's decision upheld.

The appellant, a former employee of the LCBO, requested records relating to his civil and criminal cases involving the LCBO.

The LCBO denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Inquiry Officer found that the LCBO conducted a reasonable search for records.

The Inquiry Officer determined that the settlement agreements ending the civil proceedings fell within the exception in section 65(7) and were subject to the Act, ordering the LCBO to issue an access decision for those records.

The remaining records were found to be excluded from the Act under section 65(6) as they related to employment matters in which the LCBO had an interest.

A school board appealed a decision by the Management Board Secretariat denying access to a severance agreement of a senior management employee under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The institution claimed exemptions based on solicitor-client privilege, economic interests, and invasion of privacy.

The Inquiry Officer found that the executed severance agreement was not subject to solicitor-client privilege and its disclosure would not prejudice the government's economic interests.

While the agreement contained personal information, the public interest in scrutinizing the expenditure of public funds on senior employee severance packages outweighed the privacy interests, except for specific personal identifiers and presumed privacy invasions which were ordered severed.

The appellant requested access to two Ontario Labour Relations Board files relating to applications made during a strike.

The Board denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

The Inquiry Officer found that section 65(6) did not apply to records maintained by the Board in its capacity as an impartial adjudicator, as it did not have an interest in the proceedings in the sense intended by the Act.

However, records originating with or sent to the Management Board of Cabinet (the employer) were excluded.

The Board was ordered to issue a new access decision for the non-excluded records.

The appellant requested access to records contained in two Ontario Labour Relations Board files concerning unfair labour practice complaints.

The Board denied access, claiming the records were excluded from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act under section 65(6).

On appeal, the Inquiry Officer found that the Board, acting as an impartial adjudicator, did not collect or maintain the records in relation to proceedings in which it had an interest as an employer.

Therefore, section 65(6) did not apply to the Board's own records.

However, records originating from or sent to Ontario Hydro (the employer) were excluded under section 65(6)1.

The Board was ordered to issue a new decision letter for the non-excluded records.