Race - direct
Racial hatred

Employment

Financial compensation
Apology - private
Employment - Training opportunity provided

$15,000

The complainant, who is of Lebanese/Armenian racial origin, is employed with the respondent finance company. The complainant alleged his former supervisor sent him an email about Muslim women that he found offensive, as his wife is Muslim. He also alleged that the individual respondent called him an ‘Arab’ and a ‘bomb thrower’ in front of other staff and also told him to ‘speak English’. The complainant said that after he made an internal grievance about his supervisor, his higher duties were removed, his work was over-scrutinised and his performance was unfairly criticised.

The individual respondent denied sending the email and said his comments were misunderstood. The company advised that in response to the complainant’s internal grievance, they met with the individual respondent and he moved to a different section of the company. The company denied that action taken in relation to the complainant’s work performance was because of the complainant’s race or because he had made an internal grievance.

The complaint was resolved at a conciliation conference. The individual respondent provided the complainant with a verbal apology at the conference. The company agreed to pay the complainant’s legal costs to the value of $5,000 and provide the complainant with a training fund to the value of $10,000 to assist his career development. The company also agreed to hold a staff meeting to confirm that the type of behaviour that was the subject of the complaint was unacceptable and to advise that the dispute between the complainant and the individual respondent had been resolved.

Race - direct

Employment

Financial compensation

Statement of regret - private

$7,000

The complainant advised that he is Aboriginal and was employed with the respondent manufacturing company. The complainant alleged that a senior supervisor told him that he should not apply for a promotion as he is an ‘Abbo’ and therefore incapable of fulfilling the role. The complainant said he made an internal complaint but felt the matter was not handled appropriately. The complaint resigned from his employment.

When the company was informed about the complaint, they confirmed that the complainant had reported the incident but said they understood the matter had been resolved. The company agreed to participate in conciliation without providing a formal response to the complaint.

The complaint was resolved at a conciliation conference with an agreement that the company would pay the complainant $7,000 compensation and the company and the individual respondent would provide the complainant with statements of regret.

Ethnic origin - direct

Ethnic origin - indirect

Employment

Complainant satisfied with response/information provided/action taken

The complainant advised she is from Switzerland and speaks English with a French accent. The complainant applied for a position as an events organiser through a recruitment agency. She said a staff member from the agency left a message for her but when she called back and spoke to this staff member, she was told the position was no longer available. The complainant said her partner and friend, who do not have French accents, called to enquire about the position and they were told the position was still open. The complainant claimed the respondent agency discriminated against her because of her origin and her accent.

The managing director of the respondent agency advised the Commission that the employee named in the complainant had been dismissed. The managing director offered to meet with the complainant to discuss her concerns. The parties met a few days later and after this meeting, the complainant advised the Commission that the action taken by the managing director resolved her complaint.

Race - direct

Employment

Statement of regret - private

The complainant who is Indigenous, advised that she has a disability and is in a same sex relationship. The complainant is employed with a small company that uses the services of an external accountancy firm. The complainant claimed the respondent accountant, in his role as a workplace participant, sent an email which disparaged her race, disability and sexual preference.

The respondent acknowledged he had sent an email.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the respondent would provide the complainant with a statement of regret for offence or hurt caused by the email.
 

National origin/extraction - direct

Employment

Statement of regret - private

Financial compensation

$150 gift voucher

The complainant is from Russia and worked with her Australian husband at their business. The complainant claimed that one of her husband's business partners referred to her as a 'Russian bride' on a number of occasions.

The respondent denied the complainant's claims.

The complaint was resolved with the respondent agreeing to provide the complainant with a statement of regret and a gift voucher worth $150.

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Employment

Apology - private

Policy change/change in practice (internal staff)

The complainant advised that she is of Indian background and a single mother. She claimed the manager at the retail store where she works imposes harsher rules on her than other employees and constantly criticises her work. She also said a manager had made a comment about her accent which she found offensive and her roster was changed without any notice, which made it difficult for her to arrange childcare.

The respondent company denied the allegations of discrimination.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would implement a number of measures to improve communication between staff and management. The company also apologised to the complainant for the way management had responded to her concerns and assured her that staff would be spoken to about the issues she had raised.

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Employment

Material removed from website/other publication

Apology - public

Other - please specify

The complainant, who is of Indian background, claimed a recruitment agency discriminated against him on the basis of his race. He said an online job advertisement placed by the agency specified ‘No chinkers or Indians'.  

The agency advised the Commission that the template of a previous employee had been used for the advertisement and the advertisement had not been checked for accuracy before being loaded onto the website. The agency said the comment in the advertisement does not represent the agency’s views.

The complaint was resolved with the agency agreeing to remove the advertisement, audit the website for content and issue a public apology on the website.

Ethnic origin - indirect

Employment

Employment - job offer

The complainant, who is of Indian origin, was employed on a causal basis with the respondent processing company. The complainant said she asked for leave to travel to India to visit her mother who was ill and was advised that her job would be available when she returned. The complainant said that when she returned after 6 weeks she was told there was no work for her. She alleged discrimination on the basis of her race and/or association with a person with a disability.

The company denied discrimination and said it is unable to hold a casual employee's position open for six weeks. The company said the complainant was told she would need to reapply for her position on her return. The company claimed a number of other people had been employed during the complainant's absence.

The complaint was resolved with the company agreeing to employ the complainant in a position similar to the one she held previously.

Ethnic origin - direct

Ethnic origin - indirect

Employment

Financial compensation

Apology - private

$300

The complainant, who is from Bangladesh, alleged that her employment at a retail shop was terminated because of her race. She also claimed that the owner of the shop questioned her ability to read English and did not pay her for the hours she worked.

On being advised of the complaint, the respondent agreed to participate in conciliation.

The complaint was resolved with the respondent agreeing to pay the complainant for 30 hours work and provide her with a verbal apology.

Colour - direct

Colour - indirect

Employment

Financial compensation

$7,500

The complainant is of Filipino/Laotian origin and was employed as a production worker by the respondent manufacturing company. The complainant alleged that while on a tea break with fellow workers, the individual respondent called him a “black Santa” and a “black c**t”. The complainant also alleged that he was denied training opportunities because he was the only trade union member in the workplace.

The individual respondent claimed the "black Santa" comment was made as part of a joking conversation. The company said it investigated the incident but there were conflicting statements about what had occurred. The company denied that the complainant was refused any training or promotion opportunities.

The complainant did not want to continue working with the company and the complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would pay the complainant $7,500.

National origin/extraction - direct

Race - direct

Employment

Financial compensation

$5,000

The complainant, who is of Indian origin, was employed with the respondent information technology company for approximately 6 weeks. She claimed that because of her race, her performance was unfairly assessed and her employment was terminated.

The respondent company said the complainant's employment was terminated during the probation period due to performance issues.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would pay the complainant $5,000 compensation.

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Employment

Financial compensation

Statement of regret - private

$4,000

The complainant, who is Indigenous, was employed with the respondent non government community organisation. The complainant claimed her manager treated her less favourably than non Indigenous staff. Her allegations included that her manager asked her to do humiliating and degrading office cleaning and did not provide her with opportunities for professional development.

The respondent organisation denied the complainant's claims and said that concerns about work performance had been raised with the complainant. The organisation said the complainant had participated in a number of professional development courses and general office tidying duties were part of her role.

The parties participated in a conciliation conference and the matter was resolved with the respondent agreeing to pay the complainant $4,000 compensation and provide her with a statement of regret.  

National origin/extraction - direct

Employment

Financial compensation

Policy - anti-discrimination/EEO policy developed

Training - anti-discrimination/EEO staff training introduced

Reference/Statement of Service provided

$7,500

The complainant, who is American and has carpel tunnel syndrome, was employed in an administrative role at the respondent medical service. The complainant alleged that her co-workers made derogatory comments about Americans, including that Americans think they know everything and that there were “cultural differences” between her and other staff. The complainant also alleged that her employer did not accommodate her medical condition. The complainant claimed her employment was terminated because she sustained an injury to her hand and made an internal complaint.

The respondent service denied that derogatory comments were made about Americans and said the phrase “cultural differences” was used in an attempt to resolve a disagreement between the complainant and another member of staff. The service said it was not aware that the complainant has carpel tunnel syndrome or any other disability. The service claimed the complainant’s employment was terminated for performance reasons and due to an incident where she put patients at risk.

The complaint resolved with an agreement that the respondents would provide the complainant with a statement of service, undergo training in relation to discrimination issues and implement an equal employment opportunity/discrimination policy. The respondent also agreed to pay the complainant $7,500 general damages.

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Employment

Financial compensation

Reference/Statement of Service provided

$3,400

The complainant, who is Indigenous, was employed as a trainee with the respondent company. The complainant alleged that because of his race, he was not provided with adequate training, support or feedback and his employment was terminated.

The respondent company claimed the complainant did not engage in self-directed training to build his experience and failed to pass required assessments. The company said they had to reduce staff to cut costs and the complainant's employment was terminated because he was not competent.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would provide the complainant with a statement of service and $3,400 general damages.

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Employment

Employment - other opportunity provided

Apology - private

The complainant, who is of Chinese ethnic origin, is employed with a government agency. He alleged he was denied training and transferred between offices because of his race.

The agency denied race discrimination. The agency said there was a misunderstanding with respect to the training issue. The agency claimed the complainant was transferred on one occasion because he had difficulties working with his manager and on the second occasion, because of operational reasons.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant would be placed in an agreed branch office. The agency also provided the complainant with an apology.

Race - direct

Employment

Financial compensation

Statement of regret - private

Reference/Statement of Service provided

$5,500

The complainant claimed he was bullied during his employment with the respondent manufacturing company because he is Aboriginal. He alleged co-workers called him “nigger” and “dog”. He said he complained to management about this but no action was taken and his employment was terminated.  

The company said the complainant was dismissed because of his inability to follow instructions to ensure the health and safety of other employees. The company said the complainant's internal grievance was investigated.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would provide the complainant with a statement of regret and a statement of service and also pay him $5,500 compensation.

Racial hatred

Racial hatred

Material removed from website/other publication

The complainant, who is of Asian background, complained about a website which he said advocated violence against Asians. The comments on the website included:
"Asians take all our good Jobs and Careers leaving us aussies to have to fight and often miss out on a opportunity for spots in our universities and good jobs." "Asian People Flood our city with there Asian shops with their language all over them, having their own dedicated "china town" and their own suburb.." "..we understand everyone has different Levels of hate for Asians and so we have.... Yellers. Their job is to Yell at the asians with passion i.e."YOU GOOK F**K OFF TO CHINA" and do what ever they can to show Asians they are not welcome in Australia.. ..Fighters., are their to express there anger physically by laying the Gooks out."

On receipt of the complaint, the Commission contacted the Internet Service Provider (ISP) to establish the identity of the website owner. Within a few days of contacting the ISP, the ISP advised that the website had been disabled because it breached the ISP's Acceptable Use Policy.

The complainant informed the Commission that the action by the ISP resolved his complaint.

Racial hatred

Colour - direct

Race - direct

Racial hatred

Section 9 only

Statement of regret - private

Policy change/change in practice (internal staff)

The complainant lodged a complaint on behalf of his 18 year old son who is of Ethiopian origin. The complainant alleged that during a recent game between his son's football club and the respondent football club, a player from the respondent club called his son a 'black c**t'. He also alleged a member of the respondent team's coaching staff told his son to 'wash the dirt off’, which was a derogatory reference to his son's skin colour. The complainant advised that his son's club made a formal complaint to the football league about the player's comment but he was not satisfied with how the matter was handled. The complainant said he wished to complain against both the respondent football club and the football league.

The respondent club said its player denied making the alleged comment. The club confirmed that a member assisting the coaching staff said 'wash the dirt off’, and advised that this member has been counselled. In its response to the complaint, the club said it has zero tolerance for racism and expressed regret for what occurred. The complainant advised the Commission that this response resolved his complaint against the club.

The respondent football league advised that it had investigated the complaint in accordance with its rules and procedures. The league said the matter went to a hearing and the tribunal found that the player had made the alleged comments. However, the player successfully appealed the decision.

The complaint against the football league was resolved by means of a telephone conciliation process. The terms of agreement included an undertaking by the league to review and revise its complaint procedures to ensure clearer procedures for investigating complaints and to provide for conciliation before a hearing.

Racial hatred

Racial hatred

Material removed from website/other publication

The complainants, who are of Aboriginal background, complained about a respondent social networking site. They claimed that a social group titled ‘No I’m Not Bloody Sorry & Don’t Have Anyone to Be Reconciled With!’ was created and loaded onto the respondent site. The complainants alleged the members of the group made comments that racially vilified Aboriginal people. Some of the comments included:
'Why should I have to apologise for something that happened over 200 years ago? Consider it survival of the fittest.'
'I have nothing wrong with an Aboriginal being named Australian of the Year, but when it's just handed out as a token gesture rather than being EARNT...'

After being advised of the complaint, the respondent company informed the Commission that the group had been disabled from the website because it violated the site's user policy.

The complainants advised the Commission that the action taken by the respondent company resolved their complaint

Race - direct

Race - indirect

Provision of goods & services

Statement of regret - private

Financial compensation

$600 gift vouchers

The complainant, who is Aboriginal, claimed that when shopping in the respondent department store, her sons and her were followed inappropriately by a security guard. She claimed this was because they are Aboriginal. The complainant said she complained to the store manager but no action was taken.  

The respondent company and the security guard denied race discrimination. The respondents said the complainant and her sons were in a high risk section of the department store and the security guard adopted a position where he could observe the complainant and her children, staff in the store, and the entrance to the store.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would provide the complainant with a statement of regret and provide $200 gift cards to the complainant's three sons.

Race - direct

Provision of goods & services

Apology - private

The complainant, who is of Aboriginal background, went to purchase clothes in the respondent’s store. The complainant claimed a staff member told her that she could not return the clothes if they smelt of body odour or smoke. The complainant said she tried to return the clothes on the same day, but the store would not give her a refund. The complainant said the police were called and after that, she received a refund.

When advised of the complaint, the store indicated a willingness to try to resolve the matter.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company would provide the complainant with a written apology which included an outline of the anti-discrimination and EEO training provided to employees.  

Race - indirect

Ethnic origin - indirect

Provision of goods & services

Apology - private

The complainant, who is of Asian ethnic origin, said that on numerous occasions he was asked to leave the respondent casino because security staff thought he was intoxicated or affected by drugs. The complaint alleged he was ejected from the casino because of his race.

On being advised of the complaint the respondent company agreed to participate in conciliation

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the casino would provide the complainant with a written apology which included a statement confirming the company's commitment to ongoing training of security staff.

Race - direct

Access to places & facilities

Provision of goods & services

Financial compensation

Apology - public

$11,000

The complainants, who are Aboriginal, advised they were barred from a local hotel on the basis that their welfare, or the welfare of their dependants, was considered to be at risk because of their excessive use of gaming machines. The complainants appealed the hotel's decision which was subsequently overturned. The complainants claimed the hotel then tried to ban them for hygiene reasons and for allegedly asking other hotel patrons for money and cigarettes. The complainants said these allegations against them were totally unfounded and based on racial stereotypes of Aboriginal people.

The hotel advised the Commission that there had been a mistake in relation to the initial reason for barring the complainants. The hotel said the complainants were barred because of their behaviour and complaints by other hotel patrons. The hotel said the decision had nothing to do with the complainants' race.

The complaints were resolved at a conciliation conference with an agreement that the hotel would pay each complainant $5,000 and contribute $1,000 towards their legal costs arising from the complaint. The respondent also agreed to issue a publish an apology, acknowledging that there had been a misunderstanding regarding the decision to bar the complainants and confirming that the complainants are welcome at the hotel.  

Race - direct

Racial hatred

Ethnic origin - direct

Provision of goods & services

Racial hatred

Statement of regret - private

The complainant, who is of Pakistani origin, claimed that a petrol station attendant vilified him and treated him less favourably by saying “This is Australia, not Pakistan where things get swapped by people” and  “You all Pakistanis are bastards”.

The respondent company said the employee in question no longer worked for them. The company claimed that while the manager of the petrol station was aware of a verbal dispute between the complainant and the employee, he did not hear what was said.

The complaint was resolved on the basis that the company would provide the complainant with a statement of regret. The company also invited the complainant to continue using its services and assured him that such an incident would not happen again.

Race - direct

National origin/extraction - direct

Provision of goods & services

Statement of regret - private

The complainant, who is of Indian origin, claimed that because of his race, he was told he was not welcome to play badminton at a local badminton club. He also alleged he was subjected to verbal abuse by some non-Indian members of the club.  

The club denied that the complainant was not allowed to play because he is Indian. The club claimed there was a misunderstanding and acknowledged that they did not clearly explain the rules to the complainant. The club said that certain individual members may have conducted themselves inappropriately.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the club would provide the complainant with a statement of regret for the misunderstanding and any hurt and humiliation the complainant had suffered.