FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Patricia Serluca and AFSCME
Local 1303-125,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 92-56
Risk Manager/Labor Relations
Specialist, New London Personnel Department,
Respondent September 9, 1992
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on July 30, 1992, at which time the complainants and the respondent
appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and
argument on the complaint. This matter
was consolidated for hearing with contested case docket nos. FIC92-17 and
FIC92-110.
After consideration of the entire record, the
following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The
respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letters
dated January 9, 1992 and February 7, 1992, the complainants requested of the
respondent copies of annual and monthly leave balances for the staff of the New
London welfare department.
3. By letter
of complaint filed with this Commission on February 10, 1992, the complainants
appealed the respondent's denial of this request.
4. It is
found that the respondent failed to respond to the complainants' request as
outlined above either verbally or in writing.
5. It is
found that the parties understand the complainants to be seeking the monthly
and annual report of employee leave balances including records concerning sick,
vacation, holiday, funeral, union leave and compensatory time.
6. It is
found that in addition to the attendance information contained in employees'
personnel files, the records at issue are maintained for auditing purposes in
files separate from employee personnel files.
Docket #FIC 92-56 Page
2
7. The respondent
claims that the requested records are exempt pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.,
because their disclosure would constitute an invasion of the employees' privacy
in that by characterizing any absences as sick leave or sick time, the reason
for absences from work is disclosed.
8. It is
found that the respondent failed to notify any affected employees of the
complainants' January 9 and February 7, 1992 requests pursuant to
1-20a(b), G.S.
9. It is also
found that the complainants are not seeking information about the nature of any
employee's illness or health: the request is limited to one for records
concerning any leave pay compensation.
10. It is
concluded that the employees at issue have no reasonable expectation of
confidentiality regarding the characterization of their compensation or
absences from work as that information is restricted to information supplied
for payroll or auditing purposes.
11. It is
further found that a reasonable person would not suffer embarrassment as a
result of the disclosure of information concerning sick time and compensation,
because sick time is an ordinary benefit of employment generally used by
employees in accordance with the terms of their employment.
12. It is
also found that public employees are not protected under 1-19(b)(2), G.S.,
from any embarrassment that might result from disclosure of records showing an
abuse of sick time, because such disclosure would not be an invasion of
personal privacy within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.; the exemption was
not intended to shield the attendance records of public officials from public
knowledge.
13. It is
concluded that the respondent has not met his burden of proof with respect to
his claim that the requested records are exempt from disclosure under
1-19(b)(2), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint.
1. The
respondent shall forthwith provide the complainants with copies of the
requested records identified in paragraph 2 of the findings, above, for the
period from July 1, 1985 to the present time.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 9, 1992.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
Docket #FIC 92-56 Page
3
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c),
G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING
ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR
THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED
CASE ARE:
Patricia Serluca
AFSCME, Local 1303-125
16 Maple Street
Waterford, CT 06385
Risk Manager/Labor Relations
Specialist New London Personnel
Department
c/o Attorney Leo J, McNamara
Conway, Londregan &
McNamara
38 Huntington
P.O. Box 1351
New London, CT 06320
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission