Disclosure by employer University of personal data about performance of a teacher rated in evaluation questionnaires completed by students to specific academic staff selection committee and for doing staff progress review was held by AAB to be for a directly related purpose.
Students completed evaluation questionnaires after attending courses - ratings for performance of the teaching staff disclosed by employer and used for personnel appraisal purposes - no change of use as within stated purpose - DPP3
The complaint
The complainant was a teaching staff of the University. The University had disclosed his personal data contained in students' evaluation ratings to the academic staff selection committee ("the Selection Committee") and for the purpose of doing staff progress review ("the Progress Review") without the complainant's prior consent. The said students' evaluation ratings have been marked "confidential". The Complainant complained to the Privacy Commissioner against the University for unauthorized disclosure of his personal data without his consent.
Findings by Privacy Commissioner
The Privacy Commissioner conducted enquiry of the matter. The University explained that it was duly authorized by the relevant teaching manual ("the Manual") and the evaluation of teaching staff handbook ("the Handbook") to so disclose the personal data to the Selection Committee and for doing the Progress Review.
Having considered the University's representation, the Manual and the Handbook, the Privacy Commissioner was of the view that the disclosure was made for a purpose directly related to the purpose of collecting the data by the University, namely to monitor and evaluate the teaching performance of the complainant as its employee. The Privacy Commissioner therefore found no prima facie evidence of any change of use of the personal data by the University inconsistent with DPP3.
On the basis of the above, the Privacy Commissioner considered that further investigation of the complaint was unnecessary and thus exercised his discretion not to carry out a full investigation pursuant to section 39(2)(d) of the PD(P)O.
The appeal
The complainant appealed to the AAB against the decision of the Privacy Commissioner not to carry out a full investigation. The AAB agreed with the Privacy Commissioner that there was no change of use of the complainant's personal data by the University. The AAB was of the further view that it was within the powers of the Privacy Commissioner under the PD(P)O to have a preliminary enquiry before exercising his powers to refuse investigation. The AAB also ruled that the fact that the students' evaluation ratings were marked "confidential" did not mean they could not be disclosed to the Selection Committee without the complainant's consent, provided such disclosure was for the purpose for which they were collected or for a directly related purpose.
AAB decision
The AAB upheld the Privacy Commissioner's decision and dismissed the appeal.