Question of the day
Friday, Jul 20, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Dusty Rhodes…
Speaking on behalf of the Illinois Education Association — the state’s largest teachers’ union — Bridget Shanahan says more than 1,000 teachers have received emails from MyPayMySay, and they aren’t buying it.
“How could you honestly think a legal team that was out to destroy workers’ rights is actually going to stand up for you in the face of adversity in the workplace?” she asks.
MyPayMySay is funded by a conservative think-tank called The Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Based in Michigan, the non-profit filed one of the three amicus briefs cited by the high court in its Janus decision. Mackinac is a member of the State Policy Network, a national consortium of conservative think-tanks (Illinois Policy Institute is among them) whose funders include the Koch brothers and the Walton family.
School districts across the state have received Freedom of Information requests seeking teacher records, Shanahan says. Some requests come from a post office box in Austin, Texas, and another comes from Prairie State Wire, the umbrella group comprising more than two dozen publications funded by conservative radio talk show host Dan Proft. Proft’s Liberty Principles political action committee has received major donations from Gov. Bruce Rauner.
“They are looking for our members’ personal information,” Shanahan says. “Some of them are asking for the amount that our members pay in dues. They are asking for personal contact information for our members — home address, home email address, phone numbers. They’re looking for ways to contact our members.”
Personal information about some public employees, like cops and prison workers, are already shielded from public disclosure in Illinois.
* The Question: Should the state’s Freedom of Information Act be amended to specifically shield all public employees’ personal contact information from disclosure? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
free polls
- Anonimity - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 1:55 pm:
I voted yes. I think disclosing names and salaries of State employees is too much. Not that info, but including the county. Up here where I am, Cal Skinner has a blog and routinely posts salaries of employees that live in the county. I don’t think people sign up for that.
- Texas Red - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:01 pm:
Posting the name and pay /benefits of public employee pay is already a requirement under the Open Meeting ACT amendment of a few years ago - currently however it only applies to those making upwards of 70K
- Anonymous - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:03 pm:
I voted yes. Unbelievable that you lose your humanity to become a servant of the people, as if they own you.
Anyone signing up to work for the public needs to sign a form indicating that there are consequences to this line of work and they should be fully informed. Everything about them and their lives is now an open book.
It’s really too bad that the compensation packages of private employees isn’t published too. Wow. Would alot of folks have to eat some of their words.
- Skeptic - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:04 pm:
Yes.
Knowing how to contact me directly doesn’t make my work (i.e., the use of tax dollars) any more transparent and certainly raises privacy issues.
- Norseman - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:05 pm:
Voted Yes. Contact information serves no public interest. It only opens employees to harassment via unwanted contacts by outside sources or worse from a significant portion of our society that routinely vilifies public servants.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:05 pm:
I think their social security numbers should also be subject to FOIA, along with dates of birth and mothers’ maiden names. jk.
Directory information only (name, title, department, office address, phone and e-mail if applicable) should be available. Home addresses should not be subject to FOIA.
- Smitty Irving - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:06 pm:
Yes. FOIA is about citizen access to goverment, not a data mining tool for marketers (commercial or political).
- JS Mill - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:08 pm:
Voted “Yes”. FOIA is about the public record of governmental bodies, not the private information of employees.
FOIA laws should also be amended to include politicians like everyone else. No special protections for the governor or MJM.
- Occam - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:11 pm:
I believe Cal Skinner has submitted a FOIA request to every school district in McHenry County for their union dues deductions.
And Jack Franks, the McHenry County Board Chairman has submitted a FOIA request to every school district in the county requesting the compensation information for every teacher and administrator in the county.
- DuPage Saint - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:23 pm:
I voted yes. As said above department info only. Anything further get a subpoena and show cause. Really irritating that these are out of state requests although I suppose it is their right
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:23 pm:
===routinely posts salaries of employees that live in the county===
That’s not what this question is about. That stuff should be public. The question is whether their personal contact info should be private.
- thunderspirit - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:23 pm:
Yes, of course it should.
Salary information and office location data is perfectly fine; tracking expenditures of public institutions and bureaus is prudent. Personal information should be off limits.
- Leslie K - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:24 pm:
===FOIA is about the public record of governmental bodies, not the private information of employees.===
Well said. I also voted yes. As a public employee, I do not like that my salary is public, but I concede that it is a public matter. My home address and other personal details are not. If someone wants to contact me because I am a public employee, contact me at work. I think all public employees should have that privacy and security protection.
- Not It - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:27 pm:
A related question is whether or not it is appropriate to protest outside a government official’s home. This is unofortunatley becoming common and further erodes people’s interest in serving the public.
- Leslie K - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:31 pm:
===Really irritating that these are out of state requests although I suppose it is their right===
Actually, the Supreme Court ruled a few years ago that States can limit FOIA to people in that state. I’m not sure how many states actually do though.
- Perrid - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:34 pm:
I voted yes. There’s no need for you to have personal information. Pay, and arguably dues if the state is withholding it, should be public, but not emails or phone numbers.
- Anonimity - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:37 pm:
==That’s not what this question is about. That stuff should be public. The question is whether their personal contact info should be private==
You ever go on a website and they ask your birthday, gender and zip code? You can be specifically identified 87% of the time with just that info. Imagine what scammers can do with you actual name, county and salary? You may as well give people your personal contact info.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:38 pm:
Voted “Yes”
“Why?”
Name, position, salary, yep, all public record.
The personal contact information seems very excessive and a bit intrusive. Not every little thing needs to be overtly publicly available via FOIA.
- Excessively Rabid - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:40 pm:
If a labor organization is the exclusive representative for a bargaining unit, nobody should be contacting any of the employees in the unit about representation, unless there is a union election taking place. That’s a different issue than disclosure without consent, but it comes to about the same result.
- illini - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:41 pm:
According to the answers to the question there are 19% of the respondents that voted “No”. I would really like to know their reasoning to make personal information available.
- Paper pusher - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:42 pm:
FOIA officer here.
Personal contact information of public employees can be redacted from records or withheld entirely under 5 ILCS 140/7(1)(b). Of course, the onus is on a public body to actually apply this exemption. I’m in favor of the GA making it clearer in the statute and effectively moving it from a “May” exempt to a “shall” exempt.
Of course, and this part is a little unclear in Rhodes’ story, the workaround is that any employee’s govt-funded email address and desk number are not exempt under FOIA. I imagine this group is using any contact information they can obtain.
- Tired - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:50 pm:
Definitely agree, especially in the case of state and local law enforcement. No one should be targeted because of their choice to pursue a career in civil service / public safety.
- Anonimity - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:52 pm:
==I’m in favor of the GA making it clearer in the statute and effectively moving it from a “May” exempt to a “shall” exempt==
“Shall” is a bad word to use. Courts have routinely decided that when a contract or statute says “no person shall” it means “no person may” not “must”. If you mean must, say must.
- Honeybear - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 2:56 pm:
Oh God please yes
Remember in 2015 or 2016 the
“Survey calls”
That we got from some company in FL?
It was anti union people
Probing our Afscme membership
With our personal cell phone numbers
Our personal info had been breached
Please protect our privacy
- Ron Burgundy - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 3:23 pm:
Yes it should be excluded from disclosure, if for no other reason than every agency has at one time or another had to contact the State Police due to excessively rabid, unstable people contacting them who won’t accept the answers given them. It’s bad enough having to get harassing calls and e-mails at work because your information is public, it should not follow you home.
- City Zen - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 3:24 pm:
==It’s really too bad that the compensation packages of private employees isn’t published too.==
When taxpayers are required to buy a software license from me, I will gladly share my salary.
- Anonymous - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 3:30 pm:
“Depends”
Staff directory information? Ok.
Home phone and email, emergency contacts, anything like that? No
- Steve - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 3:46 pm:
I voted yes. No one should have to have their personal contact information available to be doxxed….
- Dead Head - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 3:56 pm:
Hell yes, is the personal contact information of private employees available?
- Smitty Irving - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 4:07 pm:
City Zen -
FDIC basically protects depositors from losing their deposits. Should financial institution data be made public? What about defense contractors (road construction payroll data is available via FOIA)?
- Chris Widger - Friday, Jul 20, 18 @ 4:14 pm:
==According to the answers to the question there are 19% of the respondents that voted “No”. I would really like to know their reasoning to make personal information available.==
I voted no. FOIA should not be amended in any way unless the amendment includes making the General Assembly subject to FOIA (it is currently exempt). I don’t want to fix the wallpaper of a house when the foundation is rotting.
- the Patriot - Monday, Jul 23, 18 @ 9:00 am:
Yes,
People have a right to know where their money is being spent, but if you want to contact a public employee there are sufficient ways of doing so at work for legitimate reasons.
Aside from political targeting, how would you like to be met outside your home by angry parents because their kid got a bad grade?