FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Corinne E. Gill and Middletown

Managers and Professional Association,

Complainants

against Docket #FIC 1997-154

Personnel Director, Personnel Department,

City of Middletown,

Respondent January 28, 1998

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 17, 1997, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared, and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.

2. By verbal request made on May 1, 1997, the complainants requested to inspect “all information and documentation having to do with the categories, evaluative figures and their application as used by the City of Middletown in the computation of employee salary grade levels”, which records were also known as “the complete Thompson report” (the “requested record”).

3. As previously indicated in writing, the respondent again declined to allow an inspection of the requested record.

4. By letter dated May 8, 1997, and filed with Commission on May 9, 1997, the complainants appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information Act by declining to provide a copy of the requested record.

5. The respondent contends that the requested record is exempt from mandatory

disclosure pursuant to §1-19(b)(6), G.S., which exempts:

test questions, scoring keys and other examination data used to administer a licensing examination, examination for employment or academic examinations….[emphasis added]

6. The respondent submitted the requested record for an in camera inspection by the Commission.

7. It is found that the requested record is a scoring key which uses a point system to evaluate positions or jobs held by a specific individual or individuals. The respondent performs an “inquiry” or “investigation”, as the word “examination” is defined by the College Dictionary, using the requested record to determine the number of points that should be accorded to the attributes required for each position or job.

8. It is found that the requested record is used to examine whether an employee’s application for an upgrade in his or her employment is warranted. Whether a position is upgraded determines the wages for an employee, the single most important condition of employment.

9. It is found that 520 employees of the City of Middletown are employed in 200 different job descriptions, so that in many cases only a single person occupies a given job description.

10. It is found that, if an employee seeking to upgrade his or her position were able “to game” the scoring key by claiming job factors that would result in enough points to cause a salary upgrade, there would be many cases where the respondent would not be able to detect the claim of a higher level of skills than was, in fact, necessary to perform a given job.

11. It is concluded that the requested record is a “scoring key” for an “examination for employment”, as those terms are used in §1-19(b)(6), G.S., and therefore that the requested record is exempt from mandatory disclosure.

12. Accordingly, it is concluded that the respondent did not violate §1-19(a), G.S., when it declined to allow the complainants to inspect the requested record.

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 28, 1998.

_________________________

Doris V. Luetjen

Acting Clerk of the Commission

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

Corinne E. Gill and Middletown Managers and Professional Association

P.O. Box 1300

Middletown, CT 06457-1300

Personnel Director, Personnel Department, City of Middletown

c/o Trina A. Solecki

City Attorney’s Office

245 deKoven Drive

P.O. Box 1300

Middletown, CT 06457-1300

__________________________

Doris V. Luetjen

Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC1997-154/FD/tcg/01281998