Principal lawyer reprimanded for behaviour during scandalous company retreat
Benjamin Aulich, principal of Aulich Lawyers, was found guilty of professional misconduct and received a reprimand and a $20,000 fine for his behaviour during a continuing professional development weekend training retreat with his employees in February 2021. This included taking his pants off during a card and drinking game, performing a cabaret dance with a rose between his teeth, and looking the other way when an explicit colouring book was circulated among his employees during a training session on mental health.
ACT’s Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) presidential member Geoffrey McCarthy said the matter was not about “morals and prudishness” but rather the “professional obligation on a legal practitioner” to behave consistently with what the community expects.
The card game, which occurred on the first night as a “spontaneous rather than premeditated” activity, required the players to “do something” when a particular card was drawn from the deck. When a card instructed the “oldest person at the table” to remove their pants, Aulich, then 48, took his jeans off. Some of the employees tackled Aulich to the ground, and one of the women who attended tried to take the jeans from him. Video footage of the game suggested Aulich “appeared to treat the episode as humorous”, as did some of the employees.
The ACT Law Society submitted there “could not reasonably be any doubt” that the conduct amounted to professional misconduct.
Unfair dismissal: Talking on the phone during work hours
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with a case involving unfair dismissal claims which centred around a casual worker’s termination and the circumstances surrounding it. The Commission had to navigate through conflicting accounts from the worker and the employer, examining issues such as casual employment expectations, proper dismissal procedures, and what constitutes a valid reason for termination.
The casual retail assistant who had been working at a delicatessen in southeast Melbourne claimed she was unfairly dismissed after experiencing a panic attack at work triggered by a conversation with her mother who lived in a Ukraine war zone. According to the worker’s testimony, her manager confronted her while she was on the phone and yelled at her to leave. A few days later, she received a text message stating there were no shifts available for her that weekend. When she inquired about her employment status, she received no response. The employer, on the other hand, denied terminating the worker’s employment. They argued that the worker had either resigned or abandoned her job, citing allegations of bullying made against the manager by the worker’s partner.
The FWC determined that the worker had indeed been dismissed on the employer’s initiative. It rejected the employer’s claim that the worker had resigned or abandoned her employment, stating: “It is completely untenable for the company to suggest that [the worker] resigned or abandoned her employment in these circumstances. Contrary to the company’s submission, the fact that [the worker] had accused [the manager] of bullying her and had threatened legal action against him did not mean that she was resigning or abandoning her employment. There is simply no logical basis for this contention.” The FWC emphasised that there was no valid reason for the dismissal and that proper procedures were not followed.
As a result of the unfair dismissal finding, the FWC ordered compensation for the worker. This case serves as a reminder to employers about the importance of following proper procedures when terminating an employee’s employment. The decision also highlights the protections afforded to casual employees who work on a regular and systematic basis, even when their hours may be variable.
Fired over culturally inappropriate behaviour
The FWC recently dealt with an unfair dismissal case involving a small non-profit organisation in the Northern Territory and a worker who was terminated from her position as a redress officer. This case highlights the complexities surrounding cultural sensitivity in the workplace, especially when dealing with vulnerable communities.
The employer hired the worker in September 2022 as a redress officer. The organisation’s primary purpose is to advocate for the rights and wellbeing of all stolen generations in the Northern Territory. The worker’s role involved providing information about the Redress Scheme and supporting them with their applications.
In the months following the worker’s employment, several issues arose. In May 2023, the employer received a complaint that the worker had spoken over an aboriginal leader and her daughter during cultural training. This feedback was formally recorded by the employer in file notes. Despite these complaints, it appears that the worker was not formally notified of these issues until much later in her employment. This lack of communication became a significant point of contention in the case.
The FWC noted the lack of procedural fairness of the worker’s dismissal: “If [the worker]’s conduct when dealing with clients in the community was disrespectful or insensitive, then such behaviour would provide [employer] with a valid reason to terminate [the worker], but only after a concise warning had been given, appropriate training had been provided and [the worker] had been given an opportunity to improve her performance. This did not occur,” the FWC said. The Commission also said, “I am satisfied and find that [employer] did not have a valid reason to terminate [the worker]. Further, I am satisfied and find that [the worker] was not afforded her statutory entitlement to procedural fairness. [The worker] did not receive a “fair go”.”
Top cardiologist lodges defence in sexual harassment case
A prominent cardiologist accused of sexually harassing a former employee has filed his defence in the Federal Court of Australia. Jennifer De Jongh is suing Professor Chris Semsarian for damages for PTSD, emotional distress and lost income as a result of his conduct while she was working under his supervision between June and December 2022.
Mediation between Latouff and the ABC unsuccessful
The Federal Court ordered mediation between both parties in March over Lattouf’s allegations of unlawful termination against the ABC. Its failure means the case will head towards a full trial before the Federal Court.
The mediation’s failure comes weeks after the FWC sided with Lattouf in the case, ruling that she was sacked from her casual role in December.
McDonald’s to train employees to combat harassment, discrimination
McDonald’s Corp said on Wednesday it will require new training and policies to combat harassment, discrimination and violence at its 39,000 restaurants worldwide.
The move is part of the company’s plan to make safer environments for workers after it faced several lawsuits accusing it of subjecting female employees at its corporate-owned restaurants to widespread sexual harassment.
Female public servants earn $19k less than male counterparts
Women working in the federal public sector earn 86 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts, according to a gender equality scorecard released by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA).
The WGEA Commonwealth Public Sector Gender Equality Scorecard: Key Employer Results from 2022, shows the total remuneration average gender pay gap of 13.5% equates to a difference of $19,000 every year.
The Scorecard is the first of a new annual report series publishing the results from mandatory reporting against a suite of gender equality indicators. It captures data from 37 public sector employers not previously been covered by Australian Public Service Commission or WGEA’s reporting – including NBN Co, CSIRO, the AFT, the Reserve Bank and Australia Post.
WGEA CEO Mary Wooldridge says the public sector has benefited from gender equality commitments and reforms in areas the private sector struggles with, such as gender balance in management positions. Commonwealth public sector employers are also trying to deliver flexibility to help more women take leadership roles and drive gender balance in management positions.
Nearly half of public sector employers have a gender-balanced workforce (employing between 40 and 60% of men and women), compared to 27% in the private sector. In the Commonwealth public sector, women are 43.5% of the total workforce. Women hold half the governing body positions, but fewer lead these bodies.
Workplace bullying: weaponising belonging at work
In this blog, Dorothy Suskind Ph.D. explores why belonging is central to personal and professional wellbeing.
Belonging is an evolutionary longing in which connection equals protection for our bodies and souls (Sapolsky, 2004). Authentic connection is generative, encouraging us to grow while staying in alignment with our core values (hooks, 1996). True belonging encourages both interdependences, inviting us to lean on and support others, and independence, insisting we maintain personal freedom and autonomy.
At its core, workplace bullying is a covert and overt weaponisation of belonging. Workplace bullies use character assassination and ostracisation as their primary tools to revoke the target’s belonging to their work community and, most tragically, to themself. The abuse is carried out in a three-part play.
In the first act, the target is identified, most often because they broke toxic workplace norms by being an expert in the field, a highly productive contributor, and a creative problem solver. Once identified, the bully launches an underground rumour campaign, quietly quelling opportunities, sullying reputation, and crafting a case with leadership and Human Resources that they are “not a good fit.” In the second act, the target’s work is sabotaged, they are excluded from meetings and social events, and colleagues are encouraged to keep their distance or risk being targeted next. In the final stage, the character assassination is vicious and overt with full ostracization.
Inside the bullying paradigm, the moral injury and institutional betrayal create what Janoff-Bulman (2010) describes as “shattered assumptions,” a disassembling that takes place when the target no longer believes the world is benevolent, events are meaningful, and they have no inherent value. This loss is immeasurable and hard to define, leaving the target with what Boss (2021) describes as an ambiguous loss or “a loss that remains unclear and without official verification or immediate resolution, which may never be achieved.”
So, what can one to do to recreate the connections that have been lost and reclaim the sense of belonging that is an inalienable human right? Read more
Right to disconnect: IEU speaks up for members at Fair Work consultation
The Albanese Labor government has updated the Fair Work Act over the past two years, including a new “right to disconnect” for working people. On 12 June 2024, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that the Association of Independent Schools (AIS), the employer group that represents about 250 schools in the sector, had lodged a submission to the FWC as part of its review of modern awards, seeking to restrict the new right to disconnect in the Teachers’ Award based on “the retention of flexibility”: Private schools oppose right to disconnect for teachers.
On 19 June 2024, the FWC held a consultation session in Melbourne to hear from interested parties about what a “model clause” in modern awards for the right to disconnect might look like. The Independent Education Union of Australia (IEU) attended, and it supports the draft model clause from the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) which makes clear that employees are entitled to have time off and away from work, without the pressure of constant contact from their employer.
However, some employers, such as the AIS, are less supportive of this idea, seeking carve-outs and exclusions for teachers from the general right to disconnect.
The FWC indicated that time constraints might mean industry-specific clauses may need to wait, and that there would be a standard clause in place first, with applications to vary particular awards to come later.
Queensland backs down on key proposal of anti-discrimination bill
Queensland’s proposed anti-discrimination laws have been watered down and some key reforms will not be passed before the October state election. The government has opted not to scrap the contentious exemptions that allow religious schools to hire staff with the same faith, values and ethos.
The modified bill that was tabled in State Parliament by Queensland Attorney-General Yvette D’Ath will enact only some of the promised reforms. Critics of the government backdown say faith-based schools can continue to discriminate against teachers based on their sexuality, gender identity, relationship status and pregnancy. Minister D’Ath said exemptions for religious schools required further consideration.
Despite the backdown on exemptions, the Australian Christian Lobby condemned the revised bill. Queensland director Rob Norman said “It would still inflict major damage, enlarging discrimination prohibitions and imposing burdensome obligations on religious schools, consistent with creating one of the most repressive and restrictive legislative regimes against religious freedoms in Australia.” He said, “The new bill creates a hostile discrimination framework that favours ideologies that are incompatible with fundamental religious beliefs.