• Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Ethnic origin
    National origin/extraction
    Race
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Apology

    Year
    2016

    The complainant said her son, who is 17 years of age and of Indian origin, had been employed by the respondent leisure centre. The complainant claimed that because of her son’s age and race, his employer did not provide him with adequate medical treatment following a work-related injury.

    The leisure centre denied discriminating against the complainant’s son and claimed the same medical treatment is offered to any injured employee.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the leisure centre write to the complainant’s son acknowledging his hurt and distress.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Disability
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Revised terms and conditions

    Year
    2016

    The complainant has rheumatoid arthritis and lupus and drives to the hospital where she works because she is unable to use public transport. She said she was permitted to park in the underground car park of the building where she worked as an adjustment for her disability. She claimed her employer, the respondent medical services company, directed staff to no longer use the underground car park. The complainant said she was unable to use other nearby car parks because the walking distance to work was too great.

    The company advised that the decision not to allow staff to use the underground car park was made by the hospital where the company is located. The company said employees were reinbursed for the cost of using neighbouring car parks.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant be permitted to use the hospital care park and be reinbursed for parking costs at the same rate as her colleagues.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $1,000
    Year
    2016

    The complainant said the respondent airline required each infant passenger to be accompanied by an adult and therefore his two infant twins were unable to travel with their mother only.

    The airline confirmed each infant under the age of 23 months must travel with an adult. The airline claimed this policy was consistent with safety and regulatory requirements.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the airline offer the complainant $1,000 in credit towards future airline tickets.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation
    Statement of service

    Amount
    $4,500
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is 75 years of age and had been employed by the respondent club as a fulltime carpenter for about 18 years. He claimed that, after the Human Resources Manager became aware of his age, the club falsely accused him of breaching work safety rules and proposed to cut his hours with a view to transitioning him into retirement. He claimed that after he was accused of another safety incident, the club offered a package to end his employment, his manager made a comment about his age, and the club pressured him to resign.

    The club claimed the complainant had been counselled about four safety breaches in the previous 12 months. The club said a meeting was held with the complainant and a union representative and it was agreed that the complainant would resign.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the club pay the complainant $4,500 gross and provide him with a statement of service.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $50,000
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is 68 years of age and was employed as a helicopter pilot with the respondent government agency. He claimed he was asked about his retirement plans, told that he was 'getting past his used by date' and told he should think about moving on. He also claimed the agency prevented him from flying because of alleged concerns about the impact of a vision impairment on his ability to pilot a helicopter safely.

    The agency claimed concerns were held about the complainant's ability to safely perform his role and denied that the complainant’s age or disability were factors in decisions regarding his employment.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the agency pay the complainant $50,000 nett. The parties agreed to end the employment relationship.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Sex Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Sex
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Complainant satisfied with response/information provided
    Policy change/Change in practice

    Year
    2016

    The complainant is 26 years of age and was looking for work when he came across the respondent's takeaway food outlet’s advertisement. He claimed the advertisement said the business was looking for a ‘mature aged lady’ and he alleged that this was age and sex discrimination.

    The business owner explained she was looking for someone older as the person would be more likely to have the maturity to eventually take over the business. She noted all her employees were women and claimed most of her customers were male and preferred chatting to a woman when ordering their food.

    The complaint was resolved after the business owner undertook to omit any mention of preferred age or sex of applicants in future advertisements. The complainant was also satisifed that the business owner had gained a greater understanding of her obligations under federal anti-discrimination legislation through involvement in the complaint process.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $1,800
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is 56 years of age and was employed on a casual basis as a kitchen hand at the respondent club. He claimed the club stopped offering him work and told him a younger person had been employed to cope with the upcoming busier Christmas period.

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

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the club pay the complainant approximately $1800 in lieu of four weeks’ notice.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Apology - Private
    Compensation
    Reference
    Named individual(s) to undertake anti-discrimination/EEO training

    Amount
    $1,680
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 52 years of age and had performed seasonal contract work for the respondent accountancy practice for the past nine years. She claimed a staff member of the practice told her she would not be offered casual work this year because she no longer met the selection criteria and a younger person was offered the position.

    The practice noted the complainant had been offered employment over several years regardless of her age. The practice confirmed the successful applicant was younger than the complainant but said the decision was based on relevant credentials, experience and conduct not age.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the accountancy practice pay the complainant $1,680 as general damages and provide a point of contact for prospective future employers. The practice apologised to the complainant for the distress she experienced and advised that the staff member referred to in her complaint was directed to attend training on workplace diversity and equal opportunity.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Revised terms and conditions
    Compensation

    Amount
    $4,800
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 63 years of age and worked as a ward person at the respondent public hospital. He claimed the hospital failed to provide him with reasonable adjustments to accommodate his disability associated with knee replacement surgery. He also claimed younger co-workers bullied and harassed him because of his age and disability, including by calling him a ‘f***ing old c**t’ and physically threatening him. He claimed the hospital did not respond appropriately to his internal complaint about this behaviour.

    The hospital claimed reasonable steps were taken to accommodate the complainant’s disability. The hospital said the complainant’s internal grievance was investigated and as a result, one of the co-workers he referred to was issued with a first and final warning and the other co-worker was counselled.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the hospital pay the complainant approximately $4,800 as general damages. The parties agreed to end the employment relationship.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Advertisements
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Revised terms and conditions

    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 24 years of age. He claimed the respondent carwash company advertised positions open only to applicants under 20 years of age.

    In response to the complaint the company sent an email to all relevant staff reminding them to refer all proposed advertisements to head office for checking in order to prevent any potential unintended acts of discrimination.

    The complaint was resolved with an undertaking that the company would not place age requirements on future recruitment rounds, in accordance with its anti-discrimination policy.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Other

    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 67 years of age and applied for a job with the respondent government agency as a transport safety investigator. He claimed he was not invited for an interview because of his age.

    On being advised of the complaint the agency indicated a willingness to try and resolve the matter through conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved. The agency’s director of corporate services agreed to have a discussion with the complainant about the issues raised in his complaint and the recruitment processes more generally.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Immigrant status
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Other opportunity provided

    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 77 years of age and immigrated to Australia over 40 years ago. He was employed to do printing and scanning work with the respondent council. The complainant claimed he was relocated and then made redundant because of his age and immigrant status.

    The council said the complainant was relocated so he would be near the rest of his team and his role was made redundant due to operational reasons. The council claimed the complainant was provided with assistance to pursue redeployment opportunities but was ultimately unable to demonstrate his suitability for available roles.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the council contact the complainant in the future if casual work matching his skill set became available.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $630
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 22 years of age and worked 30 hours per week at the respondent restaurant. He claimed the restaurant inadvertently sent him an email indicating that it was more appropriate to get younger people to work, as they could be paid less. The complainant alleged that after this, the restaurant reduced his shifts to 12 hours per week. He resigned from his employment prior to lodging the complaint with the Commission.

    The restaurant argued that it was appropriate to offer work to people of different ages to ensure the business was cost-effective.

    The complaint was resolved on the basis that the restaurant pay the complainant $630, the equivalent of one week’s wages.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Other


    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 17 years of age and claimed the respondent organisation did not allow him to participate in a board game competition because he is under the age of 18.

    The competition organisers explained that the winner of the competition would progress to another competition which would be held overseas on licensed premises. The organisers said the complainant was not allowed to participate because, due to his age, he would not be eligible to claim the winner's prize.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant would be guaranteed entry to the following year's competition and would be offered two board games.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Sex Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Ethnic origin
    Race
    Sex
    Sexual harassment
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Financial compensation 
    Statement of regret - private 
    Statement of service

    Amount
    $15,000
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is in her fifties and of Indian Fijian background. She had been employed as an executive assistant with the respondent community organisation and claimed her manager sexually harassed her, including by referring to her breasts as "big tits" and "nice pears" and putting his hand on his crotch and making thrusting gestures.  She also claimed her manager talked about finding her a boyfriend if he was under 60 and said ‘Indian food looks like vomit’. The complainant said she resigned because of her manager’s behaviour.

    The organisation claimed the complainant never made a formal complaint against her manager, despite being aware of relevant grievance policies and processes.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the organisation pay the complainant $15,000, provide her with a Statement of Service and write to her expressing regret for the events giving rise to the complaint.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Sex Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Sexual harassment
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Statement of regret

    Anti discrimination/EEO training introduced


    Amount
    $5,000
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is 62 years of age and has a medical condition that requires him to access the bathroom frequently. He claimed a manager and a colleague at the respondent plumbing company called him names such as ‘the old fella’ and ‘you lazy old c**t’. The complainant alleged another colleague made gestures of a sexual nature behind his back when he went to the bathroom. He claimed the company failed to offer him training because he was believed to be close to retirement and terminated his employment because of his age and disability.

    The company claimed its staff had no recollection of the alleged comments, gestures or incidents. The company denied any unlawful discrimination and said the complainant’s employment was terminated because he engaged in misconduct, including the falsification of documents.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant $5,000 as general damages, write to him expressing regret for the events giving rise to the complaint and deliver anti-discrimination training to staff.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $4,500
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is over 55 and worked as a support worker with the respondent community organisation. She claimed the organisation told her that one of her clients needed a more ‘age appropriate’ worker and reduced her hours because she could not push a wheelchair due to medical restrictions associated with a back injury. The complainant said the organisation later terminated her employment.

    On being advised of the complaint, the organisation indicated a willingness to try and resolve the complaint through conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the organisation pay the complainant $4,500 as general damages.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Areas
    Access to premises
    Accommodation
    Outcome details

    Other


    Year
    2015

    The complainants advised they are of an older age group and one of them has arthritis. They claimed they were unable to access the communal pool at their residential development because there was no handrail to assist entering and exiting the pool. They claimed the development's body corporate had refused their requests to install a handrail.

    The body corporate's executive committee noted that the pool had recently required repairs in the value of approximately $500,000 and the installation of a handrail that pierced the pool membrane would void the warranty for the repairs. The body corporate said other options, such as freestanding structures, had been considered but were deemed inappropriate as they were unsafe and unsightly.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the body corporate would provide the complainants with advice obtained to date and seek advice on installation of a fixed ladder that would not voiding the warranty. If installation of a fixed ladder was not possible without voiding the warranty, the body corporate agreed to commission an independent assessment of suitable options to provide access to the pool.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Reference


    Amount
    $10,000
    Year
    2014

    The complainant, who was over 55 years of age, had worked at the respondent government agency in a fulltime management role for eighteen years. He said he voluntarily resigned his employment and accepted a five-year contract on the understanding it would be renewed for a further five years. He claimed that instead, the agency extended his contract for six months and then advertised his role on a permanent fulltime basis. The complainant applied for the position but was unsuccessful. He claimed the successful applicant did not have the requisite qualifications for the role. The complainant claimed his supervisor, who part of the recruitment panel, discouraged him from applying and said that he was 'too old and unfit' and should think about retiring.

    The agency said the complainant had been rated as suitable for the role, but claimed he had not performed as well at interview as the successful applicant. The agency said the complainant's former supervisor denied making the alleged comments.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the agency pay the complainant $10,000 and provide him with a positive written reference.

  • Act
    Age Discrimination Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Age
    Disability
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Policy change/change in practice


    Year
    2014

    The complainant's mother is 88 years of age and has Alzheimer's disease. The complainant claimed the respondent bank informed his mother she would be required to use a personal identification number (PIN) instead of a signature to pay for purchases using her credit card. He claimed his mother would be unable to do this because of her age and disability.

    On being advised of the complaint the bank indicated a willingness to try to resolve the matter by conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the bank allow the complainant's mother and other customers who have difficulty using a PIN for similar reasons, to continue using signature-based credit cards.

Pages