A confrontation between a member of the public and a city employee prompted a complaint to the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s Office seeking the name of a heavy equipment operator.

The city determined that it was not unreasonable to assume that the employee could face personal repercussions if their name was released to the complainant who had allegedly sworn and yelled at the operator and got in the way of the city vehicle on January 7th, 2020.

The city decided that the employee’s name not be disclosed under ATIPP legislation, but the complainant argued concerns over the employee’s safety lacked credibility as his actions were “level headed and assertive.”

The Privacy Commissioner ruled that the employee’s name be disclosed as it was “not an unreasonable invasion of privacy.”

From the city’s perspective:

“Considering the alleged actions already exhibited by the Complainant, it is not unreasonable to assume that similar actions would be taken in the future once he learns the identity of the operator. It is reasonable to expect a threat to the operator’s safety and mental health considering the fear the operator says he would have for himself and his family as a result of disclosing his name to this particular individual. It is the City’s position that releasing the name of the operator in this case, would result in a reasonable expectation of harm to our employee. At the very least, this harm would be the undue stress and fear brought upon the operator by releasing his name without his consent to an individual by which he has felt threatened in the past.”