Employment

Written apology

Review of policies

Introduction of guidelines for interview process

Training on discrimination law

$400

A woman alleged that during the course of an employment interview, she was asked several questions of a personal nature, including, whether she was married, her age, did she have children and whether she babysat her grandchildren. This was information that she felt uncomfortable providing because of the potential to discrimination against her on these grounds.

At conciliation the company agreed to provide a written apology to the woman and to review its policies and introduce guidelines to improve its employment interview processes to ensure that questions comply with anti-discrimination law. The company also agreed to undertake training on discrimination law, improve its interview practice and to pay the woman $400 in compensation.

Employment

Acknowledgement of distress

Policy change

Review of recruitment processes

A female professional complained that despite superior qualifications and experience she was unsuccessful in her application for permanency following a period working as a casual. The successful candidate was a young male, and the woman claimed that he had significantly less experience and formal qualifications than her. She believed that her age and sex were reasons that she did not gain permanency. She also thought that her relationship status was a consideration, as she alleged that a member of the selection panel queried she was worried about their choice, given that her ‘husband had a good job’.

At conciliation, the employer acknowledged her distress and agreed to improve their recruitment processes, and amended their Employment Policy to make specific reference to the Discrimination Act and equivalent federal law. Commitments were also made by both parties to maintain a positive personal and professional relationship in the future.

Employment

Review of induction process

Training for manager

Provision of a reference

Nil

A young person’s casual employment was terminated just before he turned 16 years of age allegedly because he was due for a pay rise. He also complained that his boss told him that he was being sacked because he was working in two different businesses in the same centre and that this was not allowed.

At conciliation, the employer agreed to review its induction process to ensure they develop a written policy about how to deal with employees working for other businesses, in direct consultation with the employee. The Manager also agreed to receive training regarding communication and management skills, and to provide the young man with a reference. The community service worker who helped the man to make the complaint also agreed to provide the business with information on maintaining appropriate personal and professional boundaries to assist their staff.

Ground

Age, Disability

Good, services or facilities

Staff training

Nil

A woman alleged that a medical organisation refused to book an appointment at a time appropriate for her mother’s needs and instead allegedly offered an allocated time for pensioners between 9 and 10am. The woman’s mother is 84 years old and a diabetic and cannot attend appointments in the morning. The complaint was resolved with the owner of the medical organisation agreeing to contact senior managers nationally about the importance of non-discriminatory practice in regards to pensioners, in particular the importance to be flexible with appointment times to accommodate the requirements of customers. The owner also requested managers to speak directly with staff about this expectation and agreed to conduct spot checks with teams to ensure the correct message is being provided. The organisation will run an annual ‘Roadshow’ to provide a consistent message to its business networks outlining expectations about diversity and discrimination issues particularly in relation to customer service.

Goods, services or facilities

Apology

Policy Change

Staff training

Nil

Two twelve year old girls went shopping in a supermarket while carrying items already paid for at another store. When exiting the store an employee searched their bags. The employee asked where the items were from and threatened to call the police if a receipt was not produced. The girls claimed this discussion took place in public, that a ‘security guard’ was present and their request to call their mother was ignored. The girl’s father alleged on behalf of his daughter that the employees presumed that the girls were thieves lying to cover up their thefts, and alleged that the girls were not given the same rights and procedures given to adults. At conciliation the supermarket agreed to provide a written apology, to introduce clearer policies in relation to dealing with alleged shoplifting incidents, particularly in regard to young people, and to ensure all staff receive training about these policies.