Dear Sir or Madam,

Please provide me with any rules, regulations or policies regarding
the making of a verbatim record [1] of an appeal, grievance,
disciplinary, etc. hearing in the University that were in effect on
the dates given below. Please also supply me with any rules,
regulations or policies regarding the use and/or presence of
stenographers (or individuals in a similar role) at appeal,
grievance, disciplinary, etc. hearings in the University that were
in effect on the dates given below:

27 February 2008

20 May 2008

(If the relevant rules, etc. were the same on both dates then
supplying them once with a statement to this effect is sufficient).

For the purposes of this request the term "appeal hearing" should
be understood to cover appeals against the outcome of the recent
"assimilation to the new grading structure and single salary spine"
exercise, as well as any other meaning which the University may
ascribe to this term.

For any such rules, policies, etc. that were in effect on the above
dates please also provide the following:

- Details of where the rules, policies, etc. are documented (e.g.
where in the Statutes or Ordinances of the University, in which
minutes of the Personnel Committee, etc.);

- The date on which the rules, etc. were agreed; and

- The date on which the rules, etc. were promulgated to the
University at large.

[1] By "verbatim record" I mean an exact record of everything that
is said at the hearing, such as might be made by a stenographer or
court reporter. Note that the University may use some other term to
describe such records.

Yours faithfully,

Bruce Beckles

Dear Mr Beckles,

Further to your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, I enclose the
University's response.

Kind Regards,
FOI Team

--------------------
University of Cambridge
Secretariat, The Old Schools
Trinity Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1TN

T: (01223 7)64142
F: (01223 3)32332
[email address]

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

Thank you for your response. I asked about regulations, policies,
etc. regarding the making of a "verbatim record" (as defined in my
original request). The relevant portion of the University's reply
was:

"There are no rules, regulations or policies that govern whether or
not an interview can be recorded."

I see two points of confusion with this reply - please could you
clarify them for me?:

(1) Is the term "interview" in your reply to be understood to be a
general term that covers all of the following: appeal, grievance,
disciplinary, etc. hearings, and, specifically appeal hearings of
appeals against the outcome of the recent "assimilation to the new
grading structure and single salary spine"?

(2) In your reply above, does the term "recording" include making a
verbatim record (as defined in my original request) of such a
hearing? I ask because such usage would not be the common meaning
most individuals would ascribe to the term "recording" in the
context above.

Please note that both of the above questions have been deliberately
phrased so that they only require simple "YES" or "NO" responses.

Yours sincerely,

Bruce Beckles

Dear FOI,

In this FOI request I asked both about making a verbatim record
("verbatim record" as defined in my original e-mail) and about the
use and/or presence of stenographers. Whilst your response may have
provided the information about making a verbatim record, it has not
provided any information about the use and/or presence of
stenographers.

For clarity, I repeat that portion of the request:

"Please also supply me with any rules, regulations or policies
regarding the use and/or presence of stenographers (or individuals
in a similar role) at appeal, grievance, disciplinary, etc.
hearings in the University that were in effect on the dates given"

I am aware that the statutory time limit for responding to my
request has not yet expired, and so you may be in the process of
dealing with this. However, in case this portion of the request has
been overlooked, I am sending you this gentle reminder.

Yours sincerely,

Bruce Beckles

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of University of
Cambridge's handling of my FOI request 'Regulations governing the
making if verbatim records of appeal hearings, etc.'.

Although the University responded to part of my request, it has yet
to respond to the remainder of my request, despite the reminder
which I sent on 23 January 2009. A response from the University is
now overdue, which means that, under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000, the University is breaking the law.

For convenience, the portion of the request to which the University
has not responded is repeated below:

"Please also supply me with any rules, regulations or policies
regarding the use and/or presence of stenographers (or individuals
in a similar role) at appeal, grievance, disciplinary, etc.
hearings in the University that were in effect on the dates given
below:

27 February 2008

20 May 2008

(If the relevant rules, etc. were the same on both dates then
supplying them once with a statement to this effect is sufficient).

For the purposes of this request the term "appeal hearing" should
be understood to cover appeals against the outcome of the recent
"assimilation to the new grading structure and single salary spine"
exercise, as well as any other meaning which the University may
ascribe to this term.

For any such rules, policies, etc. that were in effect on the above
dates please also provide the following:

- Details of where the rules, policies, etc. are documented (e.g.
where in the Statutes or Ordinances of the University, in which
minutes of the Personnel Committee, etc.);

- The date on which the rules, etc. were agreed; and

- The date on which the rules, etc. were promulgated to the
University at large."

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/re...

Yours sincerely,

Bruce Beckles

Dear FOI,

I am writing to confirm that I have received today, 28 May 2009, a
letter dated 26 May 2009 from the Administrative Secretary of the
University in response to my long overdue request for an internal
review of your handling of this FOI request. I am happy to say I
consider that the University has now adequately responded to my FOI
request in its entirety (although I do not agree with the reasoning
or decision of the internal review).

I note that, in taking this long to respond to my request for an
internal review, the University has singularly failed to adhere to
the Information Commissioner's guidance regarding the time limits
on carrying out internal reviews (Good Practice Guidance 5):

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...

which states that "a reasonable time for completing an internal
review is 20 working days from the date of the request for review.
... in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working
days.".

Further, I suspect that the only reason the University finally
carried out an internal review was as a result of my complaint to
the IC and the response (dated 22 May 2009) from the ICO to the
University (Case Reference Number FS50246295).

However, be that as it may, I am happy that the University has now
confirmed that it has no rules, regulations or policies regarding
the use and/or presence of stenographers (or individuals in a
similar role) at appeal hearings, etc. in the University. (Note
that, in this context, "appeal hearings" includes appeals against
the outcome of the recent "assimilation to the new grading
structure and single salary spine" exercise.)

For the avoidance of doubt, below I reproduce the main text of the
letter communicating the internal review decision to me:

<================== Letter begins ==================>

26 May 2009

Dear Mr Beckles,

In your e-mail of 23 February 2009, you asked for a review of the
University's handling of your FOI request about 'Regulations
governing the making if verbatim records of appeal hearings, etc.'
I have, in undertaking this review, considered the relevant
documentation.

In response to your request of 8 January 2009 (headed Freedom of
Information request- Regulations governing the making if verbatim
records of appeal hearings etc.), the University stated that there
'are no rules, regulations or policies that govern whether or not
an interview can be recorded'. In my view, the meaning and effect
of this in the context of your request (and as subsequently
explained in a letter of 5 February 2009) was that the University
had no rules, regulations or policies about both the making of a
verbatim record of employment hearings in the University and the
use and/or presence of stenographers (or individuals in a similar
role) at such hearings.

I conclude that the University's previous response was a full and
sufficient response to all parts of your request. However, I note
that you consider the request to have been unclear and/or
incomplete and so, for the avoidance of doubt, and to help you, I
can confirm that no information as specified in your request was
held by the University.

<================== Letter ends ==================>

Yours sincerely,

Bruce Beckles