Case studies – conciliated complaints of discrimination in employment
Following is a selection of case studies of conciliated complaints about discrimination in employment and occupation. You can also read AHRC Act reports on discrimination in employment and occupation provided to the Attorney General.
Discrimination on the ground of criminal record
Rowena
applied for a client service position with a Commonwealth department but was
told that her application was unsuccessful because she had a criminal record.
She claimed she had only been convicted for traffic offences and the court had
taken relevant mitigating circumstances into account at that time. Since then,
she said, she had a long history of responsible and high level employment,
including working as a manager, being promoted and receiving letters of
commendation.
The department stated that
Rowena’s criminal record included an offence of driving while disqualified
and said that the nature and repetition of her offences demonstrated a lack of
responsibility and respect for the legal system. The department claimed this
made her unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of the position, which
required honesty and integrity, ethical behaviour and compliance with lawful and
reasonable directions.
The parties
agreed to participate in a conciliation process. As a result, the department
agreed to offer Rowena the position she had applied for.
Complaint of discrimination on the ground of trade union activity
Doug had been employed as a
pattern maker with an industrial company for 13 years before being made
redundant about seven years ago. He claimed that while he was employed with the
company he had been an active trade union member and union delegate.
Over the past few years Doug had made
three separate applications for employment with the company but was not offered
a position. He alleged that he was refused employment because of his trade union
activity and claimed that he was told he would not be offered employment because
he “had a history” and had cost the company a lot of
money.
The company denied the comments
and said that, in relation to the three positions Doug had applied for, either a
more suitable applicant had been appointed or the position had been deemed
unnecessary and no-one appointed.
The
complaint was resolved through conciliation with the company undertaking not to
make disparaging remarks about Doug and providing him with a statement of
regret. The company also confirmed that Doug was able to apply for future
positions with the
company.
Discrimination on the ground of sexual preference
Anna is
employed by a Commonwealth department in a client service position. She claimed
that the department has a policy that blocks e-mails containing particular words
identified as ‘profanities’. Anna said that the word
‘lesbian’ is on this list and that e-mails sent to her containing
this word have been blocked. She complained that, as a lesbian, she was offended
by the inclusion of this word on the list.
The department said that the word
‘lesbian’ was on the list of blocked words because employees were
receiving inappropriate spam e-mails which included this word.
The complaint was resolved through
conciliation with the department agreeing to remove the word
‘lesbian’ from the list of blocked items and provide Anna with a
letter of regret.
Complaint of religious discrimination
Julie is a
Seventh Day Adventist and her religion requires that work-related activities are
not conducted on Saturdays. She claimed that to complete her registration as a
medical practitioner she was required to undertake a clinical examination on a
Saturday. Anna said the registration body would not allow her to change the day
of her exam.
In response the
registration body stated that it did not have clinical facilities of its own and
had to rely on the facilities in teaching hospitals in capital cities. The
registration body claimed that clinical facilities in hospitals in the city
where Julie lives were not available on weekdays.
The complaint was resolved through
conciliation with Julie agreeing to undertake the examination on a weekday in a
clinical hospital in another
city.
Complaint of discrimination on the ground of criminal record
Terry applied for a position as a
security liaison manager with a bank and was offered the job. He claimed that
the bank then withdrew the offer of employment because he had a criminal record
relating to deceptive conduct.
Terry
said that his criminal record was more than 10 years old and information about
his record was obtained from another bank employee and not as the result of the
standard criminal record check.
The
bank confirmed that an offer of employment had been made to Terry and then
withdrawn after they received information about his criminal record. The bank
claimed that an inherent requirement of the position was to liaise with police
services and that Terry’s criminal record made him unable to fulfil this
requirement.
The complaint was resolved
through conciliation with the bank agreeing to provide Terry with an apology and
$8,759 compensation for lost wages.
