Colin
I don't disagree that pay is an item of personal data. The problem is with
the FOIA in that the disclosure of the information is likely to be seen as "in
the public interest" with a right to know rather than a need to know. That's
where the legal imperative will come from - in my opinion of course.
The ICO seems to agree, see his FOI guidance note number 1 - pages 4 & 5.
Ian B
Ian Buckland
Managing Director
Keep IT Legal Ltd
Please Note: The information given above does not replace or negate the need
for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is essential that you do not
rely upon any advice given without contacting your solicitor. If you need
further explanation of any points raised please contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at
the address below:
55 Curbar Curve
Inkersall, Chesterfield
Derbyshire S43 3HP
(Reg 3822335)
Tel: 01246 473999
Fax: 01246 470742
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk
--------
In a message dated 30/11/04 09:39:26 GMT Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:
> In another context, S70(1) of FOIA (amendment to DPA S33A(2)) clearly
> considers pay as personal data. As such the S40 exemption would presumably apply
> to details of pay. The spirit of the legislation as opposed to the spirit of
> freedom of information therefore seems to be not to disclose.
>
> As there does not seem to be a legal imperative to disclose can it be argued
> that the processing i.e. disclosure of pay details, is necessary?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
