Private use of social media advice provided to employees
Dear Department of Human Services,
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
I request documents related to the ten most recent instances where an employee has sought information, advice, guidance, or opinion on their social media use in a private capacity.
I limit the scope of documents to:
- the original request from the employee
- the agency/department's response
- any follow-up questions and response
- only those sent to a relevant HR / conduct / social media (or similar) team (rather than managers across all areas of the organisation)
- where the original request was created in the last 2 years
Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours faithfully,
James Smith
Dear Mr Smith,
Please find attached correspondence relating to your recent Freedom of
Information request.
Kind regards,
Chelsea
FOI Legal Team
FOI and Litigation Branch | Legal Services Division
Department of Human Services
[1][email address]
[2]Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
Description: Description: Description: cid:image001.png@01CE26E6.4AB93B70
**********************************************************************
IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient only and
may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable and/or
subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon,
this information is prohibited and may result in severe penalties. If you
have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately
and delete all electronic and hard copies of this transmission together
with any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this
e-mail
**********************************************************************
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Dear Mr Smith
Please find attached correspondence relating to your Freedom of
Information request.
Kind regards,
Chelsea
FOI Legal Team
FOI and Litigation Branch | Legal Services Division
Department of Human Services
[1][email address]
[2]Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
Description: Description: Description: cid:image001.png@01CE26E6.4AB93B70
**********************************************************************
IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for the use of the intended recipient only and
may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable and/or
subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon,
this information is prohibited and may result in severe penalties. If you
have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately
and delete all electronic and hard copies of this transmission together
with any attachments. Please consider the environment before printing this
e-mail
**********************************************************************
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
Locutus Sum left an annotation ()
Note 1: Mostly I classify a response like this one to say "clarification requested" because the agency has told the applicant that some more information (or money!) is needed before the request will be processed. This time, I have put the response in the category of "refused" because it is more than 1 year since the agency responded and the applicant has not made a follow-up. This does not mean that the agency will refuse the request when an application is made in the correct (required).
Note 2: Although an application under the Freedom of Information Act 1983 of the Commonwealth of Australia does not require an application fee, this is not the case with applications in the states and territories of Australia. Then an applicant must usually pay a fee, or the request is not valid.
Note 2: It can be a problem when an applicant sends out a very large bulk request. Although it is convenient for the applicant, very often the application will not be valid. This is usually the fact when an applicant uses Right to Know to apply to an agency of a state or territory; see Note 2. When so many responses are received it is inconvenient to work out how to continue ... or even to classify the responses and often an applicant does not classify the responses so they create a backlog of unclassified responses on Right to Know.