| Potential Privacy
Issues of Electronic W-2
Tax Forms Spark Faculty Senate Motion to UC President
Paul
K. Mueller | March 12, 2007
The UC San Diego Faculty Senate ran well beyond schedule
on Tuesday, as members voiced their concerns about
potential third-party access to electronic W-2 forms.
The language of a joint motion by Chair Harry Powell
and Vice Chair Jim Posakony to UC President Bob Dynes—a
list of four actions that the authors believe will
obviate or remediate any potential disclosure of individual
financial information—drew a host of editorial
suggestions. The text of the motion was finally approved
as the meeting passed the two-hour mark.
Steve Relyea, vice chancellor for business affairs,
gave the faculty a brief overview of the issue: Since
2002, responding to requests from faculty and staff
for electronic versions of W-2 forms (to aid in electronic
filing), UCSD has provided this service, using a company
named TALX as a go-between with tax-preparation programs.
TALX has similar agreements with many companies, government
agencies, and educational institutions, including
the University of California and its campuses.
Each year, e-mailed notices remind employees of this
arrangement, and give them the ability to “opt
out” of the service if they don’t want
their W-2 information shared with TALX. Since 2002,
Relyea said, there have been no incidents of security
breaches or ID theft with TALX, and the firm’s
security and operations are regularly audited.
Sparking concern among UCSD administrators as well
as faculty, however, is the announcement of the intended
acquisition of TALX by Equifax, a major credit-reporting
service. Other campuses, notably UC Davis, have voiced
similar alarm about third-party access to confidential
information.
Despite assurances provided to UCOP by both TALX
and Equifax that no “data mining” or other
breaches of confidentiality will occur, UCSD initiated
discussions with UCOP to allow employees to have their
data removed from the TALX database, and to change
the system to an “opt in” model—currently,
unless employees elect to “opt out” and
so indicate, they’re automatically “in”—
whether they really want to be or not.
The wording of yearly notices, some of the faculty
suggested, has failed to make that clear.
The motion by Powell and Posakony suggests four steps
that they and their faculty-senate colleagues would
like UCOP to take to avoid third-party access to confidential
financial information, and to remedy any breaches
in the future. The specific language of the motion
inspired a lengthy session of suggested revisions
and amendments, but in the end, the original text
was restored, and the motion was approved:
(1) That the faculty and staff of all 10 campuses
be notified immediately and candidly of the facts
of this situation. Such notification should include
an explanation of why and by whom this action was
taken.
(2) That the faculty and staff of all 10 campuses
be given an extended period of time (until at least
July 1, 2007) to “opt out” of the electronic
W-2 system permanently.
(3) That the University of California retroactively
indemnify all faculty and staff against any personal
or financial damage caused by the transmittal of
W-2 tax forms to a third party (e.g., through identity
theft, improper disclosure, computer hacking, or
other misuse or misdirection of the information),
and immediately make whole any faculty or staff
member who is so damaged.
(4) That the Office of the President immediately
undertake the rapid development of an optional insurance
benefit for all faculty and staff that would offer
strong protection against identity theft.”
Prior to this protracted discussion, the senate attended
to other business. Chancellor Fox updated the assembly
on two key searches—the senior vice chancellor
for academic affairs and the vice chancellor for student
affairs—and welcomed faculty suggestions; and
she discussed recent meetings with Ujima to address
ongoing diversity initiatives. “I am particularly
mindful,” she said, “that we must identify
a diverse pool of candidates to lead the university
in the years ahead.”
The Committee on Academic Personnel pointed members
to a web site containing proposed revisions to its
policy
and procedure manual; the Graduate Council asked
for, and got, approval for a change in dissertation
committees for Ed.D. degrees (which brings the composition
of those committees into line with other UC campuses);
and the Senate Council presented the Report of the
Senate Task Force on Faculty Service.
Such service, the report says, “has chronic
problems, but not acute or fatal ones,” which,
however, can be significantly diminished “if
(a) service continues to be institutionally rewarded,
(b) service is widely known to be institutionally
rewarded, and (c) service is widely known to be personally
as well as professionally rewarding.”
In short, said Stephen Cox, the task force’s
chair, new faculty and others not yet serving must
be made aware of the “knowledge, pleasure, and
pride” associated with faculty service to the
university, their colleges, and their departments. |
