Office of the Saskatchewan Information and Privacy Commissioner. Guide to LA FOIP, Chapter 6, Protection of Privacy. Updated 27 February 2023. 84 writes, “Smith is a bad student” or “Smith exercises but is still out of shape”. The individual’s opinion is about Smith so the opinion is Smith’s personal information. 24(2)(b) – the views or opinions expressed by employees of a local authority, given in the course of employment, are not the personal information of the employee. For example, an employee writes, “I think we should proceed with this project” or “I think we are on the right course”. An employee’s views or opinions in terms of work product are not the employee’s personal information. This is because the employee is only offering the opinion or view as part of their employment responsibilities, not in a personal capacity. However, if the employee states “Smith is not a good employee”, the opinion is about another individual and subsection 23(1)(h) of LA FOIP would apply. IPC Findings In Review Report F-2006-001, the Commissioner found that information in a record showing the opinion or comments of a fire fighter who completed a report about a particular file intended to be furnished to the Office of the Fire Commissioner would be “work product” information and therefore not personal information of the public sector employee. In Review Report LA-2013-001, the Commissioner found that the views, opinions and comments made by employees who were witnesses in a harassment investigation were not the personal information of the employees pursuant to subsection 23(2)(b) of LA FOIP. The witnesses in question were all employees of the then Regina Qu’Appelle Regional Health Authority (RQRHA) and their statements related to things they did or said in the course of their employment. Further, the Commissioner found that opinions or views the employees of RQRHA gave in the course of their employment that related to or were about the applicant was the personal information of the applicant and must be released to the applicant. In Review Report LA-2013-003, the Commissioner found that an email written by an employee of the then Saskatoon Regional Health Authority describing the functions of the area the employee worked and the impact of a location change on the functions in the employee’s work area was not the personal information of the employee. The views or opinions were provided in the employee’s professional capacity. In addition, the contents of a Consensus Statement appeared to be the collective opinion or view of a department given in the course of employment by several employees and did not constitute personal information. In other words, the employees who signed the Consensus Statement appeared to be speaking on behalf of its department, not on behalf of themselves personally. However, some employees provided views and opinions that were outside of the employee’s duties. For
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgwMjYzOA==