Comments or opinions given in a letter of dismissal were inherently contentious from the dismissed employee's perspective and the proper forum to resolve the dispute was through the bringing of legal proceedings in the Labour Tribunal instead of resorting to a data correction request. Appeal by the ex-employee dismissed.
Complainant was dismissed by employer - letter of dismissal containing reasons for dismissal - disagreed by complainant and data correction request made - DPP6, section 22 and 24(3)(b) of the PD(P)O
The Complaint
The complainant was once an employee of a social welfare organization. He was also a shareholder of a private profit-making elderly home. In the dismissal letter given to him, conflict of interests, non-compliance with organization rules and loss of mutual trust and confidence were reasons given for his dismissal. Through a data correction request, the complainant demanded his former employer to correct his personal data as contained in the notice of termination. The former employer refused on the ground that the contents of the said letter were not considered to be inaccurate. The complainant therefore made a complaint to the PCPD.
Findings of the Privacy Commissioner
In the investigation, the former employer provided evidence to the Privacy Commissioner to support its opinion that the personal data contained in the notice of termination were not inaccurate. The Privacy Commissioner was of the view that the former employer, in accordance with section 24(3)(b) of the PD(P)O, was entitled to refuse the complainant's data correction request on the ground that it was not satisfied that the relevant personal data were inaccurate. No contravention of the provisions of the PD(P)O was found.
The Appeal
The complainant appealed to the AAB on the decision. The AAB took the view that in a notice of termination, the personal data dealing with the employee's job performance was inherently contentious and it was unlikely that the dismissed employee would share the employer's point of view. The proper avenue to resolve these differences was by way of proceedings in the Labour Tribunal, not by way of a data correction request. In the face of a dispute on facts, the role of the Privacy Commissioner was confined to considering whether the data user was indeed not satisfied that the relevant personal data were inaccurate.
AAB's decision
The AAB upheld the Commissioner's decision and dismissed the appeal.