Martin made a complaint about his union to the Labour Relations Board. When he learned that the board’s full decision had been published online, Martin requested that the board redact his name from the document. He was under the impression that his complaint to the Labour Relations Board was confidential. When the board declined his request, Martin contacted us.

The board explained that the Labour Relations Code requires it to make decisions available in writing for publication. While complainants could certainly make an anonymity request to the panel assigned to their complaint prior to a decision, such requests could not change a decision published pursuant to the
Code. Unfortunately, Martin learned of his privacy concern after his decision was made and published.

We continued our investigation and discovered the board had clear information on its website stating all board decisions would indeed be published. Additionally, the board helped protect complainants’ privacy by taking steps to ensure decisions on its website from generating name search results from internet search engines, such as Google.

While we were satisfied with the board’s response to Martin, we asked the board to consider developing a more deliberate process for complainants who might wish to seek anonymization or omission of sensitive personal information at the appropriate stage.

The board agreed to post a new privacy statement on its website, advising complainants that board decisions are published and – presumptively – include names and information relevant to the context and disposition of the dispute. Additionally, the board began updating its complaint guide to reference the privacy statement. While Martin did not get the result he wanted, his complaint led to changes that will help inform others in circumstances similar to his.