Bozeman rescinds password requirement for job applicants
Managing privacy in employee relations
I was invited to co-chair and present at the Canadian Institute's "Meeting Your Privacy Obligations" conference in Toronto. My presentation was specifically about managing privacy in the workplace, which is below if you're interested.
Here's a link if Google Docs aren't giving you due respect: Managing Privacy in Employee Relations
I have to say it was one of the best conferences of its kind that I've been to recently. The stellar speakers included Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, Alberta Information and Privacy Commissioner Frank Work and fellow bloggers Brian Bowman and Dan Michaluk. (Note: If you're reading my blog, you'll find theirs to be equally interesting and useful. So after you've read all my postings, head over there ...)
Pre-employment polygraph screening
While my blog was down, I wrote on slaw.ca about an interesting story from Nova Scotia that made national news. For those who missed it on slaw, here it is:
Slaw: Pre-employment screeningA recent story from Nova Scotia has focused a lot of attention on pre-employment screening and the use of polygraphs. Hopefully, it will encourage a larger discussion on both sides of the issue.
According to media reports, anybody applying for a job that falls within the purview of the Halifax Police Service and Fire Service is required to pay for a polygraph examination that includes a range of questions, some of which have been considered to be objectionable. (See the full questionnaire here (pdf).)
Others have objected to the use of a polygraph, as many assert it is not a reliable indicator of
truthinesstruthfulness. (If you want a refresher on how Canadian courts are to treat polygraphs, check out R. v. Béland, 1987 CanLII 27 (S.C.C.)).The media coverage has been plentiful, from the local papers to CBC's The National (Quicktime).
The former FOIPOP Review Officer has made his thoughts known (Ex-watchdog: Ditch polygraphs) as has his successor Dulcie McCallum (Nova Scotians deserve same privacy protection as others).Any debate and discussion is a good thing. It should, hopefully, focus the mind on one of the principes of privacy best practices that appears in almost every public and private sector privacy law: only collect information that's reasonably necessary for the (reasonable) purposes. If it's not necessary or not reasonable, don't collect it. Other important principles to consider: who has access to the information, how is it used and how long is it kept around?
And now for something
completely differentsomewhat relevant, yet inadmissible:
Here's CBC The National's report:
Popular entries
-
With the price of gas in the modern day, I've looked around at scooters/mopeds a little bit. An interesting thing out there is the 3 whe...
-
This month's edition of The National magazine ( National (English) - October/November 2010 ) has a significant multi-page article on pri...
-
In the "Street View" lawsuit with the Borings (see: Boring lawsuit over Google's "Street View" ), Google has filed a...
-
Following in the footsteps of British Columbia and Alberta, bar owners in Halifax are talking about rolling out a "Bar Watch" prog...
-
Every time I get on Facebook it tries to set me up with someone. Now, not to be too cynical about things, but girls who looked like that wer...
-
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal had an interesting Op/Ed on privacy, highlighting contemporary expectations of privacy. Information Age ...
-
New York City has lowest crime rate . Good, now maybe I can finally get somebody to buy that bridge I purchased last year.
-
A long-time friend of this blog just recently sent me a link to a new decision from the British Columbia Supreme Court ( R. v. Pickton , 201...
-
After a very long hiatus, I've been reinfected with the photography bug thanks to acquiring a new digital SLR (some of my recent work i...
-
June 16, 2004 In this newsletter: HAWAII EXTENDS ACT 221 Hawaii has some very impressive and generous tax incentives. Considering all the pu...