Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD89197 Case Number: LCR12366 Section / Act: S20(1) Parties: FAS - and - A WORKER |
The right of a worker to have access to his personnel file.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the
Court is satisfied that the policy and practice in FAS in relation
to access to personal files follows well-established practice
throughout the public sector. The Court does not, therefore,
recommend concession of the claim.
Division: Mr Fitzgerald Mr Shiel Mr O'Murchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD89197 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12366
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 20(1)
PARTIES: FAS
and
A WORKER
SUBJECT:
1. The right of a worker to have access to his personnel file.
BACKGROUND:
2. The worker is employed as an Instructor in FAS. In December,
1988 he contacted the Rights Commissioner Service seeking an
investigation into his unsuccessful efforts in gaining access to
his personnel file. FAS Management did not agree to attend a
Rights Commissioner's investigation but instead discussed the
matter directly with the worker. Following some meetings with
management the worker contacted the Labour Court requesting a
Court investigation and recommendation. The worker agreed to
accept the Labour Court's recommendation and the Court
investigated the dispute on 17th April, 1989.
WORKER'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. The worker is employed with FAS (formerly AnCO) for over
ten years. In that time he has worked with five Managers, one
Assistant manager and eight Section Heads. He has attended at
more than five interviews for senior positions and
accordingly, all of the people for whom he worked to would
have access to his file to input information. Information on
his personnel file may be good or bad but he has no knowledge
of it. He should have an opportunity of correcting such data.
2. The worker believes that his personnel file is jointly
owned by FAS and himself. FAS has uninterrupted access to the
file so it is only reasonable that he should also have access.
3. It is the worker's view that he should have reasonable
access to his personnel file. Reasonable access would be
access every two to three years.
COMPANY'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. There are in excess of 2,000 personnel files held in FAS
excluding files for staff who have left the organisation,
which would amount to approximately a further 2,000. The
files are the property of FAS and it is not correct to say
they are owned jointly with the employees. Once an employee
is engaged a personnel file is opened containing all relevant
information relating to his/her recruitment. From there on
additional information may be added relating to salary,
absence/medical, promotions etc.
2. There is a strict policy relating to the security and
control of personnel files (details supplied). This policy
sets down very clearly regulations relating to the security of
files, custodian levels and conditions relating to access by
personnel staff and restrictions relating to inspection by
supervisors.
3. It has always been policy that staff do not have access
to their personnel files. Files may contain sensitive
information which has been provided on a confidential basis,
e.g. references by former employers. They may also contain
interview panel assessment reports where staff members have
been interviewed in connection with applications for
promotion. A staff member can request details or verification
of factual information which may be available on their
personnel file. Personnel staff examine the file on their
behalf and verify or provide the information requested.
Example of this could be details of previous employments or
copies of open references previously supplied by them to the
organisation.
4. The practice which applies in FAS is no different to the
practice in the Civil Service in general with which FAS staff
have long established analogues in relation to salary and
certain other conditions. A similar claim considered under
the Civil Service Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme in
1980/81, Reference General Council Report No. 941, for access
to reports, records or comments which may be held on file
regarding staff in the Civil Service was not conceded at
arbitration. The practice in FAS is basically no different
from the practice in may other major organisations.
4. 5. Managers or Supervisors do not have the facility to
inject into the personnel file good or bad information without
the knowledge of the employee. There are generally three ways
by which documents containing comments on an employees
performance may end up on a personnel file:
1. A letter of sanction could be placed on a personnel
file as part of a disciplinary process. This would
only be done where the disciplinary procedure had
been invoked, the employee would receive a copy and
be advised that it was being placed on his
personnel file.
2. * Where annual salary increments are being approved
or withheld by a supervisor there is an opportunity
for a Supervisor/Manager to comment on performance.
3. Where an employee applied for promotion his/her
supervisor would be requested to complete a
standard job performance assessment form. This may
not always be necessary e.g. where it is a
promotion within their existing area. Where such
assessments are completed the job applicant is
informed of the assessment as per the requirement
printed on the assessment form. On completion of
the competition a copy of this assessment together
with other documents relating to the promotion
competition will be retained on the staff member's
personnel file.
*The worker concerned never had an increment
withheld.
6. An employee's personnel file is not available to nor can it be
inspected at any time by an interview panel. Previous job
performance assessments or interview assessments are not
available to an interview panel. The only documents relating
to the applicant which are made available to the panel are;
1. The job applicants original application for employment
with FAS (AnCO).
2. The application for the post applied for. In recent
times this may be in the form of a curriculum vitae.
3. Job Performance Assessment, if required, but completed
only in respect of the post applied for.
The interview file will also contain clear guidelines for
the interview panel on how the interview process is to be
carried out.
4. 7. Having regard to the number of unsuccessful applications
for promotion by the worker concerned with this claim there
are numerous staff in FAS who have applied for as many and
more vacancies without success over the years. His situation
is not at all uncommon.
8. It is management's understanding that this claim is not
related in any way to recent legislation under the Data
Protection Act.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the
Court is satisfied that the policy and practice in FAS in relation
to access to personal files follows well-established practice
throughout the public sector. The Court does not, therefore,
recommend concession of the claim.
~
Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
Nicholas Fitzgerald
28th April, 1989 -------------------
A. McG/U.S. Deputy Chairman