Summary of Findings - external consultant - Spector 360

download Summary of Findings - external consultant - Spector 360

of 2

description

REPORT TO CHIEF ADMISTRATIVE OFFICER DISTRICT OF SAANICH EXCERPT FROM CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL REPORT By Brian Simmons, Labour Relations Consultant June 20, 2015 Review of the actions of staff with respect to any possible breaches of policy or general conduct

Transcript of Summary of Findings - external consultant - Spector 360

  • 1

    REPORT TO

    CHIEF ADMISTRATIVE OFFICER

    DISTRICT OF SAANICH

    EXCERPT FROM CONFIDENTIAL PERSONNEL REPORT

    By Brian Simmons, Labour Relations Consultant

    June 20, 2015

    Review of the actions of staff with respect to any possible

    breaches of policy or general conduct SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF FACT

    1. Finding The Decision to install Employee monitoring software was made within the proper authority of the District CAO.

    2. Finding A decision to increase security due to a new incoming Mayor was reactive and may have pre-empted greater discussion on privacy matters.

    3. Finding The facts are not in dispute that there was very little discussion about the decision to go ahead with the forensic auditing software. It is likely that greater discussion may have avoided some unforeseen errors.

    4. Finding I share a conclusion found by the OIPC Report that there was a level of Information & Privacy awareness lacking in the culture of the District.

    5. Finding Given the short turnaround time to secure software, the IT staff completed the task professionally and were able to meet the forensic audit objectives.

    6. Finding There is not sufficient evidence to make a conclusive finding whether the

    Network Access Form was given to the Mayor or not.

    7. Finding As pointed out by the OIPC, it was an oversight to not notify the Mayor

    and employees of the type of monitoring software being installed; this was

    consistent with the Districts reliance upon an outdated policy that set out a

    different understanding than the OIPC. The error was common to the CAO and

    Directors.

    8. Finding Pursuant to the OIPC, the Commissioner found that when an employee

    raised some privacy concerns the District relied upon an outdated policy to allow

    the software installation. That authority came from the CAO.

    9. Finding The release from the OIPC infers that there exists some ambiguity in

    the Districts January 14, 2015 press release but I am not aware of any evidence

    that lead me to a finding that it was a deliberate attempt to mislead

  • 2

    10. Finding The evidence supports the management claim that the incoming Mayor

    was granted the same network access privileges and his computer was configured

    the same as the outgoing Mayor.

    11. Finding I find that on the balance of probabilities, and considering all of the

    circumstance, the evidence does not support a claim that the Mayors computer

    was targeted.

    PRINCIPLES OF EMPLOYMENT REVIEW STANDARDS OF PROOF

    It is well recognized that an Employer may dismiss an employee where the employee

    has provided just cause for terminating the employment relationship. Employers must

    determine if the conduct of the employee is incompatible with the terms and conditions

    of employment. The evidentiary burden on an employer is clear and cogent evidence.

    SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF STAFF CONDUCT

    It is not surprising that some of the persons who made wrong decisions believe they

    made the right decision. This was the perfect storm. The decision to move up a

    scheduled security upgrade was done quickly, and that resulted in several missed

    opportunities to look closer at the Privacy implications of that type of software being

    installed. As the Information & Privacy Commissioner pointed out, if a Privacy Impact

    Assessment was undertaken, all of this may have been avoided. It was an error, but

    certainly I could find no evidence of malfeasance of conduct by any employee, or

    person interviewed in this process.

    Finding no evidence of malfeasance, I find no cause to terminate or discipline any

    employee based upon those considerations.

    From a perspective of a review of the actions of staff taken in this matter, I find that the

    staff that I engaged with were professional and competent in all related matters

    discussed. I accept the OIPC finding that a corporate privacy awareness was lacking

    that may well have avoided this event.

    But I found no evidence that would single out any particular individual in this matter,

    rather it was a corporate decision.

    From a Human Resource perspective, that has been endorsed by the District, the

    implementation of the Information and Privacy Commissioners recommendations should

    continue. At this date, 6 months after the fact, it is my observation that the staff would

    benefit greatly from closure to this matter.