IPC - Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario

Français

Site Map

Advanced Search

Subject Index Listing

Reconsideration Table

Judicial Review of Municipal Orders

Judicial Review of Provincial Orders

Judicial Review of Privacy Complaint Reports

The Acts

Recent Orders

I97-054M

Document		I97-054M


Institution/HIC		INVESTIGATION REPORT INVESTIGATION I97-054M A COUNTY February 6, 1998


Summary		INTRODUCTION Background of the Complaint This investigation was initiated as a result of a privacy complaint regarding a county's social services department (the County). The complainants were concerned about a form provided by the County to welfare applicants/recipients to record information about job searches. The complainants' view was that the County's requirement that applicants for welfare benefits obtain the signature of prospective employers forced applicants to provide the form to the employer. Thus, the applicant was identified as a recipient or applicant for welfare benefits and was subjected to unnecessary embarrassment and humiliation. The complainants' view was that the disclosure of the status of an individual as a welfare applicant/recipient to a prospective employer contravened the disclosure provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act ). Issues Arising from the Investigation The following issues were identified as arising from the investigation: (A) Was the information in question the complainants' "personal information", as defined in section 2(1) of the Act ? If yes, (B) Did the County disclose the personal information in compliance with section 32 of the Act ? RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION Issue A: Was the information in question the complainants' "personal information", as defined in section 2(1) of the Act ? Section 2(1) of the Act states in part, that "personal information" means recorded information about an identifiable individual, including, ... (h) the individual's name if it appears with other personal information relating to the individual or where the disclosure of the name would reveal other personal information about the individual; The job search reporting form includes spaces for the following information: name of welfare applicant/recipient; date; "phone date" (presumably a reporting date); date of contact with employer; employer name; employer address; a space to check off "filed application" or "not accepting" application; and "interviewed by (signature please)". The form is not printed on the County's letterhead. Although the form itself is not printed on the County's letterhead, it is our view that an employer could draw some reasonable inferences from the form. Job seekers would not use such a form unless they are required to do so by an agency in a position to confer a benefit or impose a sanction. We considered other circumstances where individuals who are not welfare recipients might be required to conduct a job search and found that individuals receiving employment insurance benefits are required to conduct a job search. Individuals on probation may also be required to conduct a job search as a term of their probation. Although the job search information is subject to verification by the agencies administering these programs, it is not the agencies' practice to require the individual to obtain a prospective employer's signature on a form. Therefore, an individual who presents a job search form to a prospective employer for the employer's signature would most likely be identifiable as an applicant/recipient of welfare benefits. Further, in our view, area employers would be familiar with the County's form and, therefore, could conclude that the applicants are welfare applicants/recipients if they are provided with the form for the purposes of affixing a signature. Thus, it is our view that the fact that the complainants were in receipt of, or were applying for, welfare benefits would be disclosed to the prospective employer if the form was provided to them. It is our view that the complainants' names, together with information that identified them as welfare applicants/ recipients met the requirements of paragraph (h) of the definition of "personal information" in section 2(1) of the Act . Conclusion: The information in question was the complainants' "personal information", as defined in section 2(1) of the Act . Issue B: Did the County disclose the personal information in compliance with section 32 of the Act ? Although the County did not make the disclosure of the complainants' personal information directly to the employer, it is our view that the County's requirement for the complainants to obtain signatures from prospective employers resulted in "constructive disclosure" of the complainants' personal information. In other words, the County was responsible for the complainant's disclosure of personal information to the prospective employer, although the complainants were the instruments of the disclosure. The Canadian Law Dictionary states that the term "constructive" is applied where a transaction or operation has not really taken place, but something equivalent has. For example, the delivery of the keys of a warehouse in which goods are stored may be considered to be the delivery of the actual goods themselves. The courts have applied the constructive concept in various types of cases, ruling that the crucial factor is the intention of the party who is alleged to have constructively done something. The party must have intended the result which came about. The courts have further ruled that the intentions of the party may be inferred from the actions of that party. If the party can be shown to have intended the result, then he or she is said to have constructively done that thing. While the County may not have desired that welfare recipients disclose personal information to employers, it appears to have intended it as an inevitable consequence of the job seeking process which it dictated. Under the Act , an institution shall not disclose personal information except in the circumstances outlined in section 32. (See Appendix A for complete text.) We examined the provis


Legislation		MFIPPA 2(1) personal information (h) 29(2) 32(b) Section 32


Subject Index		constructive disclosure Economic Duress


Published		Feb 06, 1998


Type		Privacy Complaint Report


<< Back

Main Menu