Scottish
Disability
Team
NB This is the fifth and last page of the online version of the SDT Guidance Note Freedom of Information and Disability: Briefing Notes, published in February 2005.
Universities and colleges should review the arrangements they have in place for providing information in alternative formats. Not all requests for information in alternative formats will come from disabled people. For example, requests may be made for information in languages other than English and universities and colleges will require to meet such requests under the FoI when "reasonably practicable".
Even if a request from a disabled student or prospective student for information in a specific format under the FoI may not be deemed to be reasonably practicable under the FoI, universities and colleges currently have an obligation to make reasonable adjustments for students and prospective students under the DDA which is likely to involve making marketing materials, course materials and other information which may require to disclosed under an FoI request etc available in a range of formats. The duty to make reasonable adjustments under the DDA is not in anyway affected by whether producing information in a certain way may or may not be deemed to be reasonably practicable under the FoI.
Universities and colleges should consider that all information which they hold is potentially available to the public (including email exchanges) as a result of the FoI. Therefore, all information should be reviewed in this context to ensure that insofar as possible such information does not cause potential liabilities of any kind for universities and colleges. In the context of this briefing note, particular attention should be paid to disability related information (including statistical information) which may be available either through the publication scheme or by an access request.
The potential publicity of internal communications in a university or college may lead to changes in the way people communicate. In the context of disability discrimination it is possible that people will become more sensitive to the implications which may be drawn from careless references to impairment or to particular disabled people. For example, a joking or insensitive remark may be taken to reflect a tendency to stereotype or disparage disabled people, and may be used to assist establishing a claim under the DDA.
Universities and colleges are recommended to undertake staff training in key areas such as FoI, DDA and DPA and have clear policies on written communications.
Generally speaking, any materials produced by a member of university or college staff in the course of their employment are owned by the university or college. However, some universities or colleges may have a policy where ownership rights of copyright works are waived in favour of the academic/author. Universities or colleges may also use visiting or guest lecturers or consultants who are not employees and therefore the university or college will not own the work produced by them.
Ownership issues may have implications for universities and colleges if requests for course information are made under the FoI. Unless the university or college can demonstrate that such course materials fall into one of the exempt information categories under the FoI, such course materials would require to be disclosed. However, if the university or college does not own the course materials, it may be infringing the copyright of the academic/author in making them available to members of the public. Universities and colleges are advised to review the ownership position of academic teaching materials in order to ensure that the new access rights can be implemented in such a way as to respect not only the sensitivities but also the legal rights of the authors while at the same time meeting the requirements of the FoI.
Previous page - 4: How the access rights may be utilised by disabled people.