Confidentiality of Employee Names and Compensation

All parties commenting on this issue support some type of confidentiality of employee names, with most recommending that GO 77 reports be subject to Pub.Util.Code § 583 protection. Of primary concern are the problems of identity theft and the need for individual financial information to be kept private. In its comments, PG&E agrees employee names should be confidential and also requests extending this rule to attorneys identified in the GO who are employed by the utilities. In addition to comments, PG&E filed a motion requesting we take official notice of a recent decision of the California First Appellate District in Teamsters Local 856 v. Priceless, LLC (2003) 112 Cal.App.4^th 1500, where the court affirmed a preliminary injunction prohibiting the disclosure of salaries linked to the names of individual public employees in certain situations. Though not entirely similar to circumstances in the rulemaking, we take official notice of the above case.

In the rulemaking, we stated that the Commission needs the names of employees to make the compensation information meaningful. Including employee names allows for a more comprehensive review of whether or not an individual is an actual employee of the utility and the role of that employee within the company. Generally, we are attempting to make public as many Commission records and processes as possible, and by informal request, outside parties may now access GO 77 reports. On the other hand, we also recognize the problem of identity theft, privacy concerns and the importance of keeping certain individual financial information confidential.

Classifying the entire GO 77 report under § 583 would not allow a public review of these records by outside parties and is contrary to our policy on open records. As an alternative, G/LIF, SWG, SBC California (SBC) and Southern California Edison (Edison) all suggested an option of allowing a version of the GO 77 report to be filed for public inspection, with employee names redacted. We adopt this option, as it will allow for employee names to be confidential while also providing adequate information to the Commission and its staff for use in the rate-setting process. We will order that utilities may file the GO 77-L report under § 583 on the condition an additional version of the report is provided for public inspection with employee names redacted. The confidentiality of the names of executive officers and attorneys identified in the GO was not included in the scope of the rulemaking and is not subject to this order.