Opinion
June 17, 1999.
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jane Solomon, J.).
We reject CUNY's argument that the public employment history of its employees, insofar as revealed on their job applications, should be shielded from disclosure as an unwarranted invasion of the employees' privacy under Public Officers Law § 89 (2) (b) (i). This result is supported by opinions of the Committee on Open Government, to which courts should defer ( see, Matter of Miracle Mile Assocs. v. Yudelson, 68 A.D.2d 176, 181, lv denied 48 N.Y.2d 706), favoring disclosure of public employees' resumes if only because public employment is, by dint of FOIL itself, a matter of public record (FOIL-AO-4010; FOIL-AO-7065; Public Officers Law § 87 [b]). The dates of attendance at academic institutions should also be subject to disclosure, at least where, as here, the employee did not meet the licensing requirement for employment when hired and therefore had to have worked a minimum number of years in the field in order to have qualified for the job. In such circumstances, the agency's need for the information would be great and the personal hardship of disclosure small ( see, Public Officers Law § 89 [b] [iv]).
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.