Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 4, Exemptions from the Right of Access. Updated 18 Oct 2023. 124 of LA FOIP, local authorities should ensure that subsection 16(2) of LA FOIP does not apply to any of the records. IPC Findings In Review Report 258-2016, the Commissioner an access request made by an applicant to the former Kelsey Trail Regional Health Authority (KTHR) for copies of all allegations by KTHR employees regarding the applicant’s return to work and all correspondence between specific departments and staff where the applicant was mentioned. KTHR responded to the applicant indicating that access was partially granted to some records but was withheld for others citing several subsections including subsection 16(1)(c) of LA FOIP. The record at issue for subsection 16(1)(c) of LA FOIP was an email. KTHR asserted the information severed in the email constituted “plans” and “instructions” developed for the purpose of negotiations regarding the applicant’s return-to-work. Upon review, the Commissioner found that subsection 16(1)(c) of LA FOIP was intended to capture negotiations involving a local authority and an outside party. It did not include internal negotiations with employees. In arriving at this finding, the Commissioner relied on similar interpretations by federal counterparts (see paragraph [48]). Subsection 16(1)(d) Advice from officials 16(1) Subject to subsection (2), a head may refuse to give access to a record that could reasonably be expected to disclose: … (d) plans that relate to the management of personnel or the administration of a local authority and that have not yet been implemented; Subsection 16(1)(d) of LA FOIP is a discretionary class-based exemption. It permits refusal of access in situations where release of a record could reasonably be expected to disclose plans that relate to the management of personnel or the administration of a local authority which have not yet been implemented.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==