• Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Racial hatred
    Areas
    Racial hatred
    Outcome details

    Apology - private

    Other

    Year
    2016

    The complainants are Aboriginal and live in public housing. They claimed a neighbour attempted to remove them by starting a petition around the neighbourhood and sending the petition to the government body responsible for the property. They also claimed that the neighbour made racially derogatory comments including calling them ‘black c**ts’.

    The neighbour denied starting a petition. He claimed another neighbour wrote a letter to the relevant department on behalf of house owners in the neighbourhood raising concerns about the department not adhering to its project regarding sale of properties in the neighbourhood. The neighbour denied making the alleged comments, but said there was an altercation between him and one of the complainants when he tried to raise concerns about the complainants’ grandchild throwing rocks and eggs at the neighbours' windows.

    The complaint was resolved. The complainants’ neighbour apologised for any upset or distress experienced as a result of the altercation. The parties expressed a mutual desire to improve their relationship and agreed to attend the complainants’ local church together to get to know each other better. One of the complainants agreed to speak with his grandchildren about appropriate behaviour around the neighbourhood.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Ethnic origin
    National origin/extraction
    Race
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Apology - Private
    Compensation
    Policy change/Change in practice

    Amount
    $30
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is of Chinese ethnic origin and claimed the respondent supermarket cancelled his online order for infant formula because of his ethnic origin. He advised his wife is Caucasian and claimed her order for infant formula was not cancelled.

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

    The complaint was resolved. The supermarket wrote to the complainant providing an explanation for the incident and apologising for any distress he experienced. The supermarket offered the complainant a $30 voucher and advised it would revise its policies and procedures with respect to online and in-store purchases of infant formula.

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

    Compensation
    Apology - private

    Amount
    $300
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is Indian and claimed a guard on public transport was rude and dismissive towards him in response to a timetable enquiry. He claimed the same guard was pleasant towards customers who were not Indian.

    The transport company said the guard had no recollection of the interaction referred to and there was no information to suggest the alleged treatment was based on the complainant’s race. The company said the guard had undertaken training on anti-discrimination and had been spoken to about the incident.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the transport company write to the complainant apologising for his experience and pay him $300 as a goodwill gesture.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Associate
    Victimisation
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    EEO/anti-discrimination policy developed
    Other

    Year
    2016

    The complainant was employed with the respondent government department. She claimed that colleagues made racist comments about Indian people when they were aware she was married to an Indian man and their manner towards her changed markedly when they became aware that she later married an Aboriginal man. She also claimed the department victimised her after she made complaints about racism in the workplace.

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

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the department consider the complainant’s input in the process of developing a diversity and inclusion policy and guidelines.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Colour
    Race
    Racial hatred
    Areas
    Employment
    Racial hatred
    Outcome details

    Compensation
    Statement of regret – private
    Anti-discrimination/EEO training reviewed/revised

    Amount
    $6,500
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is Aboriginal and was employed as a flight attendant with the respondent airline. She claimed that during a flight, colleagues made racially derogatory remarks in their conversation, including ‘looking so black... looking like a nigger and boong’ within earshot of the complainant and other crew members. The complainant claimed the airline did not respond appropriately to her internal complaint about the issue.

    On being advised of the complaint the airline indicated a willingness to participate in conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the airline pay the complainant $5,000 and write to her acknowledging the distress and upset she experienced as a result of the events complained of. The airline also agreed to take on board input from the complainant with respect to future discrimination and cultural awareness training. The complainant’s colleague agreed to pay the complainant $1,500 and to meet with the complainant and the colleagues aware of the incident to acknowledge that her comments were inappropriate and offensive. The complainant remained employed with the airline.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Immigrant status
    National origin/extraction
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Apology - Private
    Revised terms and conditions
    Policy change/Change in practice

    Year
    2016

    The complainant is from New Zealand and holds a Special Category Visa (SCV). He claimed the respondent home loan provider declined his application for a home loan because of his status as a temporary resident.

    The home loan provider advised applicants must be Australian citizens or permanent residents to be eligible for its home loans. Then the home loan provider said applications from 'protected' SCV holders (New Zealand citizens who arrived in Australia before 2001) would be considered, but the complainant did not fit this category. The home loan provider claimed this requirement was imposed because such applicants posed less of a credit risk.

    The complainant was resolved with an agreement that the home loan provider change its lending policy to deem New Zealand citizens holding an SCV, irrespective of their date of arrival in Australia, eligible to apply for a home loan and to provide information about this policy change on its website. The home loan provider also agreed to write to the complainant apologising for the events giving rise to his complaint.

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

    Compensation

    Amount
    $3,500
    Year
    2016

    The complainant is African-American and worked on a casual basis as a sales associate with the respondent retailer. He alleged that a manager made offensive comments to him in the workplace because of his race. He claimed the retailer reduced his shifts after he complained about this treatment and eventually forced him to resign.

    The retailer said the manager denied making any offensive comments and there was no record of any internal complaint about the alleged conduct. The retailer claimed the complainant was counselled about poor performance and chose to resign.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the retailer  pay the complainant $3,500 as an eligible termination payment.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Colour
    Race
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Compensation
    Apology
    Anti-discrimination/EEO training reviewed/revised

    Amount
    $3,200
    Year
    2015

    The complainants alleged that staff at the respondent retail outlet followed them around the store and checked their bags because they are Aboriginal. They claimed this happened again on a subsequent visit to the outlet after a complaint had been lodged with the Commission.

    The retailer claimed all bags of a certain size are searched and denied the complainants were targetted because of their race. The retailer also claimed the person who searched the complainants’ bags on their second visit was unaware that they had lodged a complaint with the Commission.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the retailer pay the complainants $3,000 as general damages, offer them two $100 gift vouchers and meet with them to apologise and discuss the retailer’s cultural awareness training.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Ethnic origin
    National origin/extraction
    Race
    Racial hatred
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Racial hatred
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Amount
    $250
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Indian and purchased goods online from the respondent retailer. He claimed that staff at a retail outlet refused to give him a refund for some of the items and that one of them said ‘Give him $11. Get him out of the store. Bloody Indie’.

    The retailer denied the complainant’s request for a refund was refused or that the alleged comments were made.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the retailer offer the complainant a $250 gift card.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Colour
    Race
    Racial hatred
    Areas
    Employment
    Racial hatred
    Outcome details

    Apology – private
    Compensation
    Anti-discrimination/EEO training introduced

    Amount
    $36,000
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Aboriginal and worked for the respondent company. He claimed colleagues wrote racist comments on the toilet door and walls, including ‘I wish it was back in the day when we could still hang niggers!’, ‘White man can’t jump, black man can’t work’ and ‘One nigger down, one to go’. The complainant claimed he told a manager about these comments but his concerns were not taken seriously. The complainant was no longer employed with the company when he lodged the complaint.

    The company said many workers, including the complainant, wrote comments on the toilet door and walls in the context of workplace banter. The company claimed the complainant had been known to bully and harass colleagues and to make racist comments about Aboriginal people.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant $36,000 as general damages, write to him apologising for the events giving rise to his complaint and implement anti-discrimination training.

  • Act
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Disability
    National origin/extraction
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Revised terms and conditions

    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Russian and advised he is not proficient in English. He also advised he has post-traumatic stress disorder and this interferes with his ability to express himself in English. He claimed the respondent public housing provider required him to complete forms in English and offered him no assistance to complete the documentation in English.

    The relevant government department claimed that language is not viewed as a characteristic of race under federal discrimination legislation. However, the department agreed to participate in conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that an onsite interpreter would be provided for appointments with the complainant. The department also agreed a telephone interpreter would be provided when the complainant visited the office without an appointment.

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

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

    Amount
    $180
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Chinese and was a contractor with the respondent car company. He claimed an employee of the company was abusive towards him and made reference to ‘f***king Chinese’ several times during a telephone conversation on speaker phone. The complainant said his wife and mother-in-law heard the interchange. The complainant no longer worked for the company when he made the complaint.

    The individual concerned acknowledged he and the complainant had a heated discussion during which he may have made inappropriate comments of a general nature. However, he denied making any comments about the complainant’s race.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant $180 ex-gratia and arrange for the individual concerned to attend anti-discrimination training. The individual referred to in the complaint agreed to write to the complainant apologising for the incident.

  • 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
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Sex Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Disability
    Ethnic origin
    Sex
    Sexual harassment
    Areas
    Education
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Enrolment provided
    Revised terms and conditions
    Compensation
    Statement of regret - private

    Amount
    $50,000
    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Jewish and was a student at the respondent public vocational training provider. He alleged the respondent lecturer sexually harassed him by asking him to spend the night with him, commenting on his sex life and making comments of a sexual nature that the complainant found upsetting and intimidating. He also alleged the lecturer and training provider failed to provide him with adjustments to accommodate a chronic health condition. Finally, he alleged the lecturer made disparaging comments about Jewish people and money and the training provider placed him in a class with other Jewish students.

    The respondents claimed the complainant was not subjected to any conduct of a sexual nature. The training provider said ethnicity was not a factor in the development of class lists and claimed the complainant had been provided with adjustments to accommodate his disability, including time off and individual tutoring.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the training provider pay the complainant $50,000, enrol him in a degree course and pay the fees for that course. The lecturer agreed to write to the complainant expressing regret for any hurt or distress caused by his conduct.

  • Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Sex Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Race
    Sex
    Sexual orientation
    Areas
    Employment
    Outcome details

    Anti discrimination/EEO training introduced

    Year
    2015

    The complainant is Chinese and worked for the respondent retailer. She claimed her managers spread rumours about her being a lesbian and stealing and made inappropriate comments about her because of her race and sex.

    The retailer advised that, while it was unable to substantiate the allegations, it would like to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the retailer deliver training on anti-discrimination and introduce relevant policies and guidelines for employees.

  • 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
    Disability Discrimination Act
    Racial Discrimination Act
    Grounds
    Associate
    Disability
    Race
    Victimisation
    Areas
    Goods, services and facilities
    Outcome details

    Compensation

    Other


    Amount
    $10,000
    Year
    2015

    The complainant, an Aboriginal woman, has Multiple Sclerosis and uses a wheelchair. She claimed the respondent building company victimised her for lodging a complaint with the Commission, including by failing to address incomplete and defective building work on her home and requiring her to deal with a specific manager.

    The company denied victimising the complainant, but indicated it would like to try to resolve the complaint.

    The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company complete building works as required by the complainant and install turf and windows at no extra cost. The company also agreed to pay the complainant $10,000.

Pages