Denied: Personnel records of discharged employees
March 19, 2009 Filed in: Denied
| Antrim Twp
| Employee
discipline | Attorneys
fees | Agency
non-compliance
Denied: A request for personnel
records reflecting the discharge of six Antrim
Township employees.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Denied: A request for personnel records reflecting the discharge of six Antrim Township employees. The township had invoked three exceptions in issuing a denial, saying that the records were pre-decisional; that they were investigative; and that they were protected by the exception for information regarding discipline, demotion or discharge.
The Office of Open Records ruled that the township did not meet its burden of proof regarding the records being pre-decisional or investigative documents, but that it did prove the records could be withheld as they were related to discipline, demotion or discharge.
The OOR noted that the law does protect performance reviews and criticisms of employees and records relating to discharge other than the final action of the agency.
The township had requested attorneys fee be awarded, but the OOR noted only the courts are authorized to award attorneys fees and costs of litigation for a frivolous legal challenge.
The OOR also cautioned the township regarding its initial failure to provide a specific reason for its denial, other saying the record requested "may" contain certain information.
Fridgen vs. Antrim Township (2) – AP 2009-0091
Denied: A request for personnel records reflecting the discharge of six Antrim Township employees. The township had invoked three exceptions in issuing a denial, saying that the records were pre-decisional; that they were investigative; and that they were protected by the exception for information regarding discipline, demotion or discharge.
The Office of Open Records ruled that the township did not meet its burden of proof regarding the records being pre-decisional or investigative documents, but that it did prove the records could be withheld as they were related to discipline, demotion or discharge.
The OOR noted that the law does protect performance reviews and criticisms of employees and records relating to discharge other than the final action of the agency.
The township had requested attorneys fee be awarded, but the OOR noted only the courts are authorized to award attorneys fees and costs of litigation for a frivolous legal challenge.
The OOR also cautioned the township regarding its initial failure to provide a specific reason for its denial, other saying the record requested "may" contain certain information.
Fridgen vs. Antrim Township (2) – AP 2009-0091