|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document
|
|
P-120
|
|
|
|
|
|
File #
|
|
Appeal 890087
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institution/HIC
|
|
Ministry of Government Services I N T E R I M
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
|
|
O R D E R This appeal was received pursuant to subsection 50(1) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1987 (the " Act ") which gives a person who has made a request for access to personal information under subsection 48(1) a right to appeal any decision of a head under the Act to the Information and Privacy Commissioner. The facts of this appeal and procedures employed in making this Interim Order are as follows: 1. The requester in this appeal was an unsuccessful candidate for the position of Senior Policy Advisor, Justice Unit, Ontario Women's Directorate. 2. On December 28, 1988, a solicitor representing the requester wrote to the Ministry of Government Services (the "institution") requesting access to "...documentation from the hiring process to which she is entitled under Freedom of Information , specifically: the list of questions asked in the interview, the score sheets relating to her interview (of all four panel members), her score, and the score of the successful candidate." 3. On January 17, 1989, the institution's Freedom of Information and Privacy Co-ordinator (the "Co-ordinator") responded to the requester, providing access to the list of questions asked in the interview, the score sheet relating to the requester's interview, and her own score. Access to the interview schedule was given, subject to severances of certain individuals' names, pursuant to subsection 21(2)(f) of the Act . Access was denied to the score sheets of the other candidates in the competition, including the score of the successful candidate under subsections 21(3)(d) and (g) of the Act . 4. On February 21, 1989, the requester's solicitor wrote to the Co-ordinator asking for access to the following additional information: 1. The document entitled "Qualifying Guide" which should include the list of qualifying factors as well as the list of candidates, and how they were initially ranked vis-a-vis the qualifying factors. In order to meet your concerns about not releasing personal information about the other candidates, we would be satisfied to receive the completed document with the names of all candidates except [the requester]'s whited out. In particular: 2. The weighting of each of the qualifying factors; 3. Expected response to the interview questions, and rating criteria against which candidates' responses were measured as required under the O.W.D. recruitment checklist (p.2); 4. The ranking of [the requester]'s total raw score of 307 points. (You have already provided [the requester]'s ranking with each of the selection panel members, but not the ranking of her raw score); 4.(a) The raw scores of the other top candidates (without naming those candidates); 5. Names of [the requester]'s references who were contacted, the dates they were contacted, and the information that was asked and received about [the requester] in those reference checks, as well as the criteria that were used to determine which references to call, if not all of them were contacted; 6. The comments of [the chairman of the interview panel] about [the requester] in [the chairman]'s capacity as a reference (I understand from [the requester] that [the chairman] appointed herself as a reference, and gave input in that capacity); 7. Without revealing the other candidates' names, the number of references which were checked for other candidates; the dates those references were contacted, and the list of questions they were asked; 8. Any other relevant information which was considered in the determination of who would be the successful candidate; 9. Any other relevant information which was considered in the determination not to hire [the requester]; 10. Any other information that mentions [the requester]'s name or relates to her, in this competition file. 5. On February 24, 1989, the Co-ordinator responded to the second request as follows: Item 1 & 2 Access is provided to the Qualifying Guide which includes the list of qualifying factors, the list of candidates, and how the candidates were initially ranked vis-a-vis the qualifying guide. The names of the other candidates have been severed pursuant to subsections 21(1) and 21(3)(d)(g) of the Act. Item 2 This record does not exist on the competition file. Item 3 These records do not exist on the competition file. Item 4 & 4(a) There is no record of the ranking of your total raw score. The raw scores of the other top candidates are severed pursuant to subsections 21(1) and 21(3)(g) of the Act. Whiting out names does not sufficiently protect privacy as the information released could be linked to an identifiable individual. Item 5 Access is granted to the names of the individuals contacted for a reference about you and the information that was received. There are no records of the dates individuals were contacted, the information that was asked, and the criteria used to determine which references to call. Item 6 This record does not exist on the competition file. Item 7 The documents on file reveal references were checked for two other candidates. There are no records of the dates individuals were contacted and the list of questions they were asked. Items 8 & 9 As far as the Freedom of Information and Privacy Office can ascertain, there does not appear to be any other relevant information on the competition file which was considered in the determination of who would be the successful candidate or in the determination not to hire you as the successful candidate. Item 10 Access if provided to letters of reference about you (apparently supplied by you), a copy of your thesis, and your resume on the competition file. There are no other records on the competition file that mention your name or relate to you. 6. On March 28, 1989, the requester met with the Co-ordinator to clarify her request. In a letter dated April 4, 1989, to the requester, the Co-ordinator characterized the clarification as follows: In our meeting, you clarified your request in two categories namely; your ranking as a candidate in relation to the others and, the number of re
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
|
-
FIPPA
-
10(1) custody or control
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by
|
|
Sidney Linden
|
|
|
|
|
|
Published
|
|
Nov 22, 1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Order – Interim
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<
Back
|
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
 |
|
|
|
© Copyright
2013
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. All Rights Reserved.
|