Skip to main content

Conciliation Register

Act Other discrimination in employment
Grounds Criminal record
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Compensation

Amount $12,650
Year

The complainant claimed that two months after she started work as a Bid Manager the respondent security company terminated her employment because of her criminal record. She claimed she had told a HR Manager about a six-year-old charge when she started employment.

The company said the complainant’s criminal record check indicated she had been charged, but not convicted, of obtaining advantage from a Commonwealth entity six years earlier and of theft over 30 years earlier. The company claimed the complainant’s criminal record was inconsistent with the inherent requirements of her role. The company advised that it had since commissioned an external company to conduct criminal record checks of applicants and employees to ensure relevant information is obtained as early as possible.

The complaint resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant approximately $12,650 less appropriate tax.

Act Other discrimination in employment
Grounds Criminal record
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Policy change/Change in practice (internal staff)

Compensation

Amount $6,000
Year

The complainant claimed the respondent private transport company told him he was not eligible for work as a driver because of his criminal record. The complainant had been convicted of dishonestly obtaining money over 20 years earlier. He claimed the company did not offer him the opportunity to discuss the circumstances surrounding his criminal record or its relevance to the job.

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

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant $6,000 as general damages. The company also undertook to consider future applications by people with a criminal record on a case-by-case basis.

Act Other discrimination in employment
Grounds Criminal record
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Apology – Private

Compensation

Policy change/Change in practice

Reference

Amount $2,400
Year

The complainant said that after 17 months of employment as a billing officer with the respondent public health service she was required to undergo a criminal record check. She said her employment was subsequently terminated because of her criminal record. The complainant had been convicted of a number of offences over a 13 year period ending three years prior, including obtaining money by deception, dishonesty causing risk of loss, embezzlement and obtaining financial advantage.

The health service said the complainant’s role involved unsupervised access to account holders’ financial information, including banking and other account details. The health service claimed the complainant’s criminal record was inconsistent with the inherent requirements of the role, taking into consideration a number of factors including the recency and nature of the offences.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the health service pay the complainant approximately $2,400 as compensation and provide her with a written reference. The health service encouraged the complainant to apply for other positions in the organisation not involving access to financial information and advised that in the future, it would ensure criminal record checks were undertaken before a person commenced employment.

Act Other discrimination in employment
Grounds Criminal record
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Compensation

Amount $12,500
Year

The complainant claimed the respondent banking corporation withdrew an offer of employment because of his criminal record. He had been found guilty of using a carriage service to menace, but no conviction was recorded. The complainant said he disclosed his criminal record to the recruitment agency when appplying for the role.

The banking corporation said the complainant signed an undertaking about his character and conduct in a deed poll, despite being aware that he had a criminal record. The corporation claimed this conduct was inconsistent with the requirement that employees of the corporation demonstrate integrity, honesty, ethics, judgement and transparency.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the corporation pay the complainant $12,500 compensation.