AW v Data#3 Limited...2016/11/25 · Senator the Hon. George Brandis QC Attorney-General Parliament...
Transcript of AW v Data#3 Limited...2016/11/25 · Senator the Hon. George Brandis QC Attorney-General Parliament...
AW v Data#3 Limited
[2016] AusHRC 105
© Australian Human Rights Commission 2016.
The Australian Human Rights Commission encourages the dissemination and exchange of information presented in this publication and endorses the use of the Australian Governments Open Access and Licensing Framework (AusGOAL).
All material presented in this publication is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence, with the exception of:
• the Commission’s logo, any branding or trademarks; and• where otherwise indicated.
To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
In essence, you are free to copy, communicate and adapt the publication, as long as you attribute the Australian Human Rights Commission and abide by the other licence terms.
Please give attribution to: © Australian Human Rights Commission 2016.
ISSN 1837-1183
Further information
For further information about the Australian Human Rights Commission or copyright in this publication, please contact:
Communications UnitAustralian Human Rights CommissionGPO Box 5218SYDNEY NSW 2001Telephone: (02) 9284 9600Email: [email protected].
Design and layout Dancingirl Designs
Printing Masterprint Pty Limited
AW v Data#3
[2016] AusHRC 105
Report into a complaint of discrimination in employment on the basis of criminal record
Australian Human Rights Commission 2016
iv
1 Introduction to this inquiry 3
2 Summaryoffindingsandrecommendations 3
3 Background 33.1 Complaint by Mr AW 33.2 ResponseofData#3 5
4 Relevantlegalframework 6
5 Consideration 65.1 Isthereanactorpractice? 75.2 Doestheactinvolveadistinction,exclusionorpreference
onthebasisofcriminalrecord? 75.3 Didthatexclusionhavetheeffectofnullifyingorimpairing
equalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentor occupation? 8
5.4 Wastheexclusionbasedontheinherentrequirementsof thePosition? 9
6 Recommendations 156.1 MrAW’ssubmissions 166.2 Data#3’ssubmissions 176.3 Considerationofcompensation 176.4 ConsiderationofData#3’spoliciesandtraining 22
7 Responsetorecommendations 24
Contents
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 1
Australian Human Rights Commission
Level3,175PittStreet,SydneyNSW2000 GPOBox5218,SydneyNSW2001Telephone:0292849600 Facsimile:0292849611 Website: www.humanrights.gov.au
March2016
SenatortheHon.GeorgeBrandisQC Attorney-General ParliamentHouse CanberraACT2600
DearAttorney,
Ihavecompletedmyreportpursuanttosection11(1)(f)(ii)oftheAustralian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)intothecomplaintofdiscriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecordmadebyMrAWagainstData#3Limited(Data#3).
IhavefoundthatData#3’sactofterminatingMrAW’semploymentasaMicrosoftSolutionSpecialistconstitutedanexclusionmadeonthebasisofcriminalrecord.ThishadtheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingMrAW’sequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation.Theexclusionwasnotbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob.
InlightofmyfindingsIrecommendedthatData#3 developworkplacepoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecord;conducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassessajobapplicantwithacriminalrecord;payMrAWanamountincompensationforlossofearnings;andpayMrAW$5,000incompensationforhurt,humiliationanddistressasaresultofbeingdiscriminatedagainst.
Data#3 provideditsresponsetomyfindingsandrecommendationson8January2016.Inparticular,itagreedtodevelopaworkplacepolicytopreventdiscriminationonthebasisofcriminalrecordandtoconductstafftrainingonhowtofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.Data#3’sresponseissetoutinpart7ofthisreport.
Iencloseacopyofmyreport.
Yourssincerely,
GillianTriggsPresidentAustralianHumanRightsCommission
2
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 3
1 Introduction to this inquiry1. ThisreportsetsouttheAustralianHumanRightsCommission’sfindingsfollowinganinquiry
intoacomplaintofdiscriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecord.ThecomplaintwasmadebyMrAWagainstData#3Limited(Data#3).TheCommissionissuedaPreliminaryViewtothepartieson31July2015.
2. Thisinquiryhasbeenundertakenpursuanttos31(b)oftheAustralian Human Rights Commission Act 1986(Cth)(AHRCAct).
3. MrAWhasaskedthathisidentitynotbedisclosedintheCommission’sreport.IhaveremovedhisnameandreferredtoMrAWbyapseudonym.Ihavemadeadirectionundersection14(2)oftheAHRCActthatMrAW’snamenotbedisclosed.
2 Summary of findings and recommendations4. Asaresultofthisinquiry,IhavefoundthatMrAWwasdiscriminatedagainstbyData#3onthe
basisofhiscriminalrecord.
5. Inlightofmyfindings,IrecommendthatData#3:
• developworkplacepoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecord;
• conducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob;
• payMrAWanamountincompensationforlossofearnings,causedbyitsterminationofhisemployment,whichIhavefoundtobediscriminatory;and
• payMrAW$5,000incompensationforhurt,humiliationanddistressasaresultofbeingdiscriminatedagainst.
3 Background
3.1 Complaint by Mr AW6. MrAWmadeawrittencomplainttotheCommissionon1May2014.HeallegesthatData#3
terminatedhisemploymentduetohiscriminalrecord.
7. Basedontheinformationprovidedbytheparties,therelevantfactsappeartobeasfollows:
a) InearlyDecember2013,MrAWinterviewedwithData#3foranITpositiondescribedas‘SolutionSpecialist–Microsoft’(thePosition),witharemunerationpackageofabout$185,000perannum.
b) Onorabout12December2013,Data#3madeajoboffertoMrAW,whichheaccepted.
4
c) On16December2013,Data#3forwardedtoMrAWitsletterofofferandnewstarterpack,includingtheEmploymentAgreement(thatincludedarequirementtoperformalldutiesoftherole),CodeofConductGuidelinesandDeclaration,andthePositionDescription.ThenewstarterpackdidnotincludeanydocumentsinrelationtoasecuritycheckoracriminalrecordchecktobecompletedbyMrAW.
d) On6January2014,MrAWcommencedworkatData#3.
e) On14January2014,Data#3discoveredthatMrAWhadacriminalrecord.Data#3submitsthatarepresentativeofa‘majorstrategicsupplier’contactedData#3andsaidthathehadfoundtwomediareportswhichindicatedthatMrAWhada‘seriouscriminalrecord’.
f) On16January2014,MrAW’smanager,MrAXscheduledameetingwithMrAW.Theprecisedetailsofthismeetingareindispute.However,itisagreedthatatthismeetingMrAWeitherdisclosedthathehadacriminalconvictioninNewZealandforsellingMDMA(Data#3’sposition),orconfirmedthathehadthisconvictionwhenitwasputtohim(MrAW’sposition).
g) On17January2014,MrAXhadanothermeetingwithMrAW.MrAWsubmitsthatduringthismeetingMrAXtoldhimthathisemploymentwouldbeterminatedduetohiscriminalconviction.
h) Subsequently,MrAWreceivedaletterfromMrAX,dated17January2014.Itstated:Ithasbeendecidednottocontinueyouremploymentunder‘Clause2.Periodofemployment’.Wereferbelow,totheextractfromyourEmploymentAgreement:
2.5Thefirstsixmonthsofyouremploymentisaprobationperiod.Duringtheprobationperiod,wewillendeavortoprovideyouwiththenecessaryguidance,feedbackandassistancetosucceedinyourposition.
2.6Atanytimeduringtheprobationperiodyouorwemayterminateyouremploymentbygivingoneweek’snotice.Ifweterminateyouremployment,wemayelecttopayyouinlieuofnotice.
Yourlastdayofemploymentisthe17thofJanuary2014…Data#3isonlyrequiredtogiveyouoneweekofnotice,howeverinthisinstancewehavedecidedtopayyouuptoandincluding3rdFebruary2014toprovideyouwithaperiodtofindalternativeemployment.
8. Inconnectionwithhiscomplaint,MrAWsubmitsasfollows:
• Hehasacriminalconvictionfrom2011,whenhewasfoundbyaNewZealandcourttohavecommittedsixcountsofsellingthedrugMDMA.Hewassentencedtooneyearhomedetention.
• DuringtheprocessofinterviewingforthePositionwithData#3,MrAWsubmits:‘IspecificallyaskedonatleasttwooccasionswhetheritwasaconditionofmyemploymentatData#3thatIpassacriminalrecordcheckorneededtoobtainasecurityclearance.Iwasassuredoneachoccasionthattherewasnosuchconditiontomyemployment.’
3 Background
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 5
• Inrelationtohisconviction,MrAWstates‘[T]hecrimeofsellingecstasy,forwhichIwasconvicted,aroseinmypersonallifeandinvolvedmeexercisingverypoorjudgementatthetime…insentencingitwasshownthatIhadbeenaninsignificantpartinthedealingofothers,namelybeinginvolvedinthecommunicationsbetweenthedealingparties.FurthermoreIwassupportedthroughdozensofreferencesattestingtomygoodcharacterandworkethic.’
• HewasandremainsabletoperformalltheinherentrequirementsofthePosition.
3.2 Response of Data#39. On11July2014,Data#3providedaresponsetothecomplaint(Response).
10. Data#3statedthat,asisevidencedbytherole’sremunerationlevelof$185,000andPositionDescription,theroleispositionedto‘strongcandidateswho,relevantly,arerequiredtodemonstrateprofessionalismandintegrityintheirinteractionswithData#3seniormanagement,Data#3’scustomerbaseoflargegovernmentandcorporatecustomersandData#3’svendorpartners’.
11. Data#3furthersubmittedthat:Underthecontractofemployment,Data#3Limitedwasentitledtoterminate[MrAW’s]employmentduringhisprobationperiodforanyreasononthepaymentofoneweek’snotice.
Data#3Limitedterminated[MrAW’s]employmenton17January2014,duringhisprobationperiod,afterreviewinghissuitabilityfortheroleandconcernsabouthisabilitytoperformtheinherentrequirementsofthatrole.…
[MrAW’s]recentandseriouscriminalactionsareinconsistentwithData#3Limited’scorevaluesandtherequirementthatbothitanditsemployees(particularlysenioremployees)musthaveandexhibitthehighestethicalstandards.Inthosecircumstances,[MrAW’s]continuedemploymentwasuntenable.
12. Data#3alsosubmitsthatMrAWwasverballynotifiedduringtheinterviewprocessofthepossibilitythatasecurityclearancemayberequiredforcertainData#3work:
Duringtheinterviewprocess[MrAW]asked[MrAX]ifhewasrequiredtogeta“securityclearance”aspartofthisrole.[MrAX]respondedwithwordstotheeffectthatasfarashewasawareitwasnotarequirementforpre-salesresourcestoobtainsecurityclearances.However…Data#3’sNationalMicrosoftPracticeManager,[MrAY],notified[MrAW]duringhisinterviewprocessthatitmaybenecessaryforhisroletopasssecurityclearancestoperformworkforandmeetwithcertaingovernmentcustomersofData#3.
6
4 Relevant legal framework13. PartII,Division4oftheAHRCAct,whichiscomprisedofsections30-35,isconcernedwiththe
Commission’sfunctionsrelatingtoequalopportunityinemployment.
14. Section31(b)confersontheCommissionafunctionofinquiringintoanyactorpracticethatmayconstitutediscrimination.Section32(1)(b)requirestheCommissiontoexercisethisfunctionwhenacomplaintismadetoitinwritingallegingthatanactorpracticeconstitutesdiscrimination.Section8(6)oftheAHRCActrequiresthatthefunctionoftheCommissionundersection31(b)beperformedbythePresident.
15. Section3(1)oftheAHRCActdefinesdiscriminationforthepurposesofsection31(b)as:(a) anydistinction,exclusionorpreferencemadeonthebasisofrace,colour,sex,religion,political
opinion,nationalextractionorsocialoriginthathastheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and
(b) anyotherdistinction,exclusionorpreferencethat:
(i) hastheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and
(ii) hasbeendeclaredbytheregulationstoconstitutediscriminationforthepurposesofthisAHRCAct;
butdoesnotincludeanydistinction,exclusionorpreference:
(c) inrespectofaparticularjobbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob;or
(d) inconnectionwithemploymentasamemberofthestaffofaninstitutionthatisconductedinaccordancewiththedoctrines,tenets,beliefsorteachingsofaparticularreligionorcreed,beingadistinction,exclusionorpreferencemadeingoodfaithinordertoavoidinjurytothereligioussusceptibilitiesofadherentsofthatreligionorthatcreed.
16. AustraliahasdeclaredcriminalrecordasagroundofdiscriminationforthepurposesoftheAHRCAct.1
5 Consideration17. Indecidingwhethertherehasbeendiscriminationwithinthetermsofs31(b)oftheAHRCAct,
Iamrequiredtoconsiderthefollowingquestions:
• whethertherewasanactorpracticewithinthemeaningofs30(1)oftheAHRCAct;
• whetherthatactorpracticeinvolvedadistinction,exclusionorpreferencethatwasmadeonthebasisofthecomplainant’scriminalrecord;
• whetherthatdistinction,exclusionorpreferencehadtheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and
• whetherthatdistinction,exclusion,orpreferencewasbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob.
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 7
5.1 Is there an act or practice?18. ‘Act’and‘practice’aredefinedats30(1)oftheAHRCAct.‘Act’and‘practice’havetheir
ordinarymeanings.Anactisathingdoneandapracticeisacourseofrepeatedconduct.
19. On17January2014,Data#3terminatedMrAW’semployment.Iamsatisfiedthatthiswasan‘act’withinthemeaningofs30(1)oftheAHRCAct.
5.2 Does the act involve a distinction, exclusion or preference on the basis of criminal record?
20. IconsiderthatData#3’sdecisiontoterminateMrAW’semploymentconstitutesan‘exclusion’withinthescopeofthedefinitionof‘discrimination’intheAHRCAct.MrAWsubmitsthatthereasonforData#3’sdecisionwashiscriminalrecord.
21. ForacaseofdiscriminationtobefoundregardingData#3’sdecisiontoterminateMrAW’semployment,itwouldneedtobeshownthattherelevantexclusionwasmade‘onthebasis’ofhiscriminalrecord.
22. Inconsideringtheexpression‘basedon’,inasimilardefinitionofdiscriminationundersection9(1)oftheRacial Discrimination Act 1975(Cth),theFederalCourtheldthatthewordsweretobeequatedwiththephrase‘byreferenceto’,ratherthanthemorelimited‘byreasonof’or‘onthegroundof’whichhavebeeninterpretedelsewheretorequiresomesortofcausalconnection.2Itdoesnotneedtobethesolereason.
23. InitsResponsedated11July2014,Data#3stated:Data#3Limitedterminated[MrAW’s]employmenton17January2014,duringhisprobationperiod,afterreviewinghissuitabilityfortheroleandconcernsabouthisabilitytoperformtheinherentrequirementsofthatrole.…
[MrAW’s]recentandseriouscriminalactionsareinconsistentwithData#3Limited’scorevaluesandtherequirementthatbothitanditsemployees(particularlysenioremployees)musthaveandexhibitthehighestethicalstandards.Inthosecircumstances,[MrAW’s]continuedemploymentwasuntenable.Further,Data#3’sNationalPracticeManager…recallsmentioningto[MrAW]verballyduringhisinterviewthatitmaybenecessaryforpre-salesrolestopasssecurityclearancestoperformworkforandmeetwithcertaingovernmentcustomersofData#3.
24. ItisevidentfromthisstatementthatMrAW’scriminalrecordwasareasonfortheexclusion.
25. However,Data#3disputesthis.Itstatesthatit’s‘decisiontoterminatewasnotbasedonthefactthathehadaseriouscriminalconviction’.Rather,Data#3submitsthatthedecisiontoterminateMrAW’semploymentwasattributabletoanotherreason:
8
[MrAW’s]historyofcriminalactivityandassociatedcriminalconvictioncaused(butwasnottheonlycause)Data#3toquestionhisabilitytoperformthesehighlightedinherentbehaviouralrequirementsoftheposition.Separately[MrAW’s]criminalrecordcausedData#3toquestiontheintegrityof[MrAW’s]conductduringtheinterviewprocess.Ourexpectationwas,thatitwasincumbenton[MrAW]tovolunteerinformationthatmayimpactonhisabilitytoperformtherole–anditwouldbemisleadingordeceptivenottodoso.Duringthisprocess,[MrAW]wasinformedbyData#3’sNationalPracticeManagerforMicrosoftthatsecurityclearancesmayberequiredtoperformworkforandmeetcertaingovernmentcustomers,and[MrAW]didnotvolunteeranyconcernsinthisregard.Weformedaninternalviewthatthisamountedtodishonestconductandhisemploymentbecameuntenableonthatfootingalone.If[MrAW]hadvolunteeredtherelevantinformation,thiswouldhavebeenassessedfairlyandequitablyaspartoftherecruitmentprocess.
26. Inits26August2015responsetotheCommission’sPreliminaryView,Data#3stated:ThedecisionofData#3toterminate[MrAW’s]employmentwasentirelybaseduponhislackofcandour,lackofgoodfaith,lackofdemonstrationofData#3corevaluesandhislackofhonestyinfailingtodiscloseaseriouscriminalconvictiontoData#3duringtherecruitmentprocess…had[MrAW]fullydisclosedhisseriouscriminalconvictiontoData#3atthistime…Data#3wouldhaveassessedthehonestyofthatdisclosure,andhisabilitytoperformtherolefully,withinthecontextofassessmentofothercandidatesfortheposition(whoweresubsequentlyunsuccessful).Duringtherecruitmentprocess[MrAW]wasinformedbyData#3thatsecurityclearanceswerearequirementtoperformtheroleforData#3,havingregardtoitscustomerandvendorrequirements…
[MrAW]wasdutyboundtodisclosehisseriouscriminalconviction…
…hefailedinhisdisclosureobligations.
27. IhavecarefullyconsideredData#3’ssubmissions.IfindthatMrAW’scriminalrecordwasareasonfortheterminationofhisemployment.ItisevidentfromData#3’ssubmissionsthatonceData#3becameawareofMrAW’scriminalrecord,itbecameconcernedabouthissuitabilityfortheroleandhisabilitytoperformtheinherentrequirementsoftheroleanddecidedtoterminatehisemployment.Itisnotnecessaryformetofindthatcriminalrecordwasthesolereasonfortheexclusion.Inthisregard,InotethatIacceptData#3’ssubmissionthatMrAW’sdecisionnottodisclosehiscriminalrecordduringtheinterviewprocesswasalsoareasonforData#3’sdecisiontoterminatehisemployment.
28. Interpretingthephrase‘onthebasisof’inthebroadersense,tomean‘byreferenceto’,IamsatisfiedthatData#3’sdecisiontoterminateMrAW’semploymentconstitutedanexclusiononthebasisofhiscriminalrecord.
5.3 Did that exclusion have the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation?
29. ThedecisiontoterminateMrAWonthebasisofhiscriminalrecordconstitutesanimpairmentofhisequalityofopportunityandtreatmentinemployment.
30. HadMrAW’semploymentnotbeenterminated,hewouldhave:
• continuedworkinginthePositionandearningafortnightlyormonthlysalaryinlinewiththebaseamountof$150,000.00perannum(plussuperannuation);and
5 Consideration
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 9
• hadtheopportunitytoachievethekeyperformanceindicatorsofthePosition,attractingabonuspaymentofupto$20,000.00perannum.
31. MrAWwasnotgiventheopportunitytodosoonthebasisofhiscriminalrecord.Data#3’sterminationofhisemploymentconstitutedanexclusionwhichimpairedhisequalityofopportunityandtreatmentinemployment.
5.4 Was the exclusion based on the inherent requirements of the Position?32. Section3(1)(c)oftheAHRCActprovidesthatdiscrimination‘doesnotincludeanydistinction,
exclusionorpreference,inrespectofaparticularjob,thatisbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob’.GivenmyfindingsthatData#3’sdecisionnottoengageMrAWinthePositionwasanexclusiononthebasisofcriminalrecord,Imustconsiderwhethertheexclusionwasbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob.
33. Section3(1)(c)isan‘exception’totheprohibitionagainstdiscrimination.Itshouldthereforebeinterpretedstrictly,soasnottoresultinunduelimitationoftheprotectionconferredbythelegislation.3
(a) Data#3’s submissions
34. Data#3providedtheCommissionwithMrAW’scontractofemploymentandthePositionDescriptionandstatedthatthesetwodocumentsdemonstratetheminimumandinherentrequirementsoftherole.ThePositionDescriptiondescribestheroleasfollows:
Workwithaccountteamsandvendorstoassesscustomerrequirementsandprovidetechnicalpresalesactivitywhichincludesarchitecting,scoping,costingandproposingsolutionsfortheSWSPresalesPractice.
35. ThePositionDescriptionalsoidentifiesData#3’scorevalueswhichinclude‘honesty&integrity’and‘respect&trust.’
36. WhenaskedwhichinherentrequirementsofthePositionMrAWwasassessedasbeingunabletoperform,Data#3stated:
Theinherentrequirementsoftherolethat[MrAW]wasassessedasbeingunabletoperform,whichcontributed toadecisiontoterminatehisemploymentinaccordancewithData#3and[MrAW’s]employmentagreementrelatespecificallytothecustomerliaisonandbehaviouralaspectsoftheposition.…
Inthekeyresponsibilities[sectionofthePositionDescriptiondocument],thefollowingphrasesandwordshavebeenhighlighted,“providecustomerswithvaluesolutions”,“scoping”,“trustandcredibility”,“activelyparticipatein…customerevents”and“buildcloseworkingrelationshipswith…vendorpartners”.Thesewordsandphrasesspeaktothecustomerfacingnatureoftherole…
Inthekeyexperience,skillsandabilitiessection[ofthePositionDescriptiondocument],thefollowingphraseshavebeenhighlighted,“experienceinacustomerfacingrole”,“abilitytopresentto…businessaudiences”,“communicationofthevaluesofsolutionstoclients”,“valuedrelationshipswithclients,suppliersandindustryleaders”,“historyofethicalbusinesspractices”.Thesephrasesspeaktothecustomerfacingnatureoftherole.
10
37. Data#3alsosubmitsthatcertaingovernmentagenciesrequiresecurityclearancesaspartofprojectspecificrequirements.Data#3statesthat‘6currentNSW/ACTemployeesofData#3performingpre-salesanddeliveryroles[outofapoolofapproximately32]haverequiredasecurityclearance’.Data#3furtherstates:
[I]nadditiontogovernmentclients,thefollowingotherclientsalsorequirepolicechecksforemployeesundertakingworkforthem:
Lawenforcementagencies
Educationagencies
ASIO
ACCC…
(b) Identifying the ‘inherent requirements’
38. Appropriateidentificationoftheinherentrequirementsofthejobisapre-conditiontoprovingthatthecomplainantisunabletoperformthoseinherentrequirements.
39. An‘inherentrequirement’issomethingthatis‘essentialtotheposition’4andnot‘peripheral’.5 Itisan‘essentialfeature’or‘definingcharacteristic’.6
40. Further,theinherentrequirementsmustbeinrespectof‘aparticularjob’.Theterm‘aparticularjob’inArticle1(2)oftheILO111ConventionhasbeenconstruedbyreferencetothepreparatoryworkandthetextoftheConventiontomean‘aspecificanddefinablejob,functionortask’andits‘inherentrequirements’arethoserequiredbythecharacteristicsoftheparticularjob.7
41. ThefactthatcertainstatementsappearinthePositionDescriptiondocument,isnotsufficienttoestablishthattheyare‘inherentrequirements’ofhisparticularjob.InQantas Airways v Christie,BrennanJstatedthat:
Thequestionwhetherarequirementisinherentinapositionmustbeansweredbyreferencenotonlytothetermsoftheemploymentcontractbutalsobyreferencetothefunctionwhichtheemployeeperformsaspartoftheemployer’sundertakingand,exceptwheretheemployer’sundertakingisorganisedonabasiswhichimpermissiblydiscriminatesagainsttheemployee,byreferencetothatorganisation.8
42. Forthisreason,asdiscussedintheCommission’sGuidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of Criminal Record:
Broadgeneralstatementsaboutajob’srequirementsarenotclearenoughtoallowforanassessmentofinherentrequirements.9
43. Forthepurposesofassessingthiscomplaint,itisnotnecessaryformetoconsidereachitemlistedinthePositionDescriptionandformaviewastowhichitemsconstituteinherentrequirementsandwhichdonot.However,IamrequiredtoidentifyandformaviewinrelationtotheinherentrequirementswhichData#3hasassessedMrAWasnotbeingabletoperform.
5 Consideration
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 11
44. BasedonData#3’sResponseandfurthersubmissionsof15May2015,itappearsthatthefollowingaretherequirementsofthePositionthatithasassessedMrAWasnotbeingabletoperform:
• Thecustomer-facingnatureoftherole,includingprovidingcustomerswithvaluesolutions,communicatingvaluesolutionstoclients,abilitytopresenttobusinessaudiences,buildingcloseworkingrelationshipswithvendorpartnersandactivelyparticipatingincustomerevents;
• Integrity,trustandcredibility,asreflectedinademonstratedhistoryofethicalbusinesspractices;and
• AbilitytoobtainasecurityclearanceorpassapolicechecktoperformworkforcertainCommonwealthandNSWgovernmentclients.
45. IacceptthatthecustomerliaisonaspectsofthePosition,includingtheattendantskills,behavioursandattributes,areinherentrequirementsofthePosition.
46. Ialsoacceptthatintegrity,trustandcredibility,includingahistoryofethicalbusinesspractices,areinherentrequirementsofthePosition.
47. However,basedontheinformationprovidedbyData#3,IamnotpersuadedthatobtainingasecurityclearanceorpassingapolicecheckisaninherentrequirementofthePosition.Thereasonsforthisfindingareasfollows:
• MrAWexpresslyraisedtheissueofwhetherhewasrequiredtogetasecurityclearanceaspartoftheroleduringtheinterviewprocess.Data#3hassubmittedthatitrespondedasfollows:
Duringtheinterviewprocess[MrAW]asked[MrAX]ifhewasrequiredtogeta“securityclearance”aspartofthisrole.[MrAX]respondedwithwordstotheeffectthatasfarashewasawareitwasnotarequirementforpre-salesresourcestoobtainsecurityclearances.However…Data#3’sNationalMicrosoftPracticeManager,[MrAY],notified[MrAW]duringhisinterviewprocessthatitmay be necessary for his role to pass security clearances to perform work for and meet with certain government customersofData#3.[Emphasisadded]
• Data#3hasfurtherstatedthat:allFederalandNSWgovernmentagenciescanrequestsecurityclearancesaspartofprojectspecificrequirements.[Emphasisadded]
ThefactthatthismaypotentiallyariseonagivenprojectdoesnotmeanthatasecurityclearanceisaninherentrequirementforeverypersonholdingthePosition.
• Data#3hasstatedthat:ThereisnosetorstandardproportionofworkundertakenbySolutionSpecialiststhatrequiressecurityclearancesformembersofthepresalesteam.Itvariesgreatlydependingonthenatureoftheworkbeingperformedandtheengagementwiththeclient.
12
PresalesandDeliverystaffemployedbyData#3formpartofanationalpoolofresources.Attimestheseresourcesmayberedeployedtoworkonprojectsinterstateiftheskillsarenotavailableinthatlocation...Data#3had3presalesemployeeswithsecurityclearancesand6presaleemployees[outofapoolof32]whohavehadtopassPoliceSecuritychecksinordertocompletetheirroles.
Aninherentrequirementmustbe‘essential’ora‘definingcharacteristic’.AsData#3hasamobileandflexiblepresalesteam,itisnotclearthatitisessentialforeverySolutionSpecialisttohaveasecurityclearance.ManySolutionSpecialistsemployedbyData#3donothavesecurityclearances.
• Aninherentrequirementmustbe‘specificanddefinable’.Data#3hasnotbeenabletospecifywhatisrequiredforasecurityclearance.Itisnotclearwhetheranypolicerecord(includingaconvictionofanykind,atanypointintime)wouldresultinanadversesecurityclearance.Data#3state‘[t]heprocessinvolvedisdrivenbytherelevantgovernmentagency.Itistheirassessmentprocessandwearenotatlibertytocommentonit.’
• Finally,InotethatthereisnoreferenceintheEmploymentcontractorPositionDescriptiontoasuccessfulcandidatebeingrequiredtopassanysortofsecurityclearanceorpolicecheck.Whilethisisnotasignificantfactorinmyreasoning,onewouldexpectthistobeclearlystatedinanypositionapplicationdocumentsifitwereaninherentrequirementofthePositon.TheCommission’sGuidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of Criminal Recorddiscussthisissueatsection5.4.10
48. Fortheforegoingreasons,onthebasisofinformationbeforeme,Iamnotpersuadedthattheabilitytoobtainasecurityclearance,ortheabilitytopassaPolicecheck,wereinherentrequirementsofthePositon.
(c) Was the distinction, exclusion or preference ‘based on’ the identified inherent requirements of the job?
49. In Commonwealth v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and Others,11WilcoxJinterpretedthephrase‘basedon’asfollows:
Inthepresentcase,therearepolicyreasonsforrequiringatightcorrelationbetweentheinherentrequirementsofthejobandtherelevant‘distinction’,‘exclusion’or‘preference’.Otherwise,asMrO’Gormanpointedout,theobjectofthelegislationwouldreadilybedefeated.Amajorobjectiveofanti-discriminationlegislationistopreventpeoplebeingstereotyped;thatis,judgednotaccordingtotheirindividualmeritsbutbyreferencetoageneralorcommoncharacteristicofpeopleoftheirrace,gender,ageetc,asthecasemaybe.Ifthewords‘basedon’aresointerpretedthatitissufficienttofindalinkbetweentherestrictionandthestereotype,asdistinctfromtheindividual,thelegislationwillhavetheeffectofperpetuatingtheveryprocessitwasdesignedtobringtoanend.12
5 Consideration
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 13
50. TheFullCourtaffirmedthatapproachinCommonwealth v Bradley13(Bradley).Inparticular,BlackCJdiscussedthephrase‘basedon’asfollows:
Respectforhumanrightsandtheidealofequality–includingequalityofopportunityinemployment–requiresthateverypersonbetreatedaccordingtohisorherindividualmeritandnotbyreferencetostereotypesascribedbyvirtueofmembershipofaparticulargroup,whetherthatgroupbeoneofgender,race,nationalityorage.Theseconsiderationsmustbereflectedinanyconstructionofthedefinitionof‘discrimination’presentlyunderconsiderationbecause,iftheyarenot,andaconstructionisadoptedthatenablestheascriptionofnegativestereotypesortheavoidanceofindividualassessment,theessentialobjectoftheActtopromoteequalityofopportunityinemploymentwillbefrustrated.14
51. TheChiefJusticethenheldthattheremustbemorethana‘logical’linkbetweentheinherentrequirementsofthepositionandtheexclusionoftheapplicant.Rather,HisHonourheldthattheremustbea‘tight’or‘close’connection.
52. InaccordancewithBradley,theissueforconsiderationiswhetherthereisatightorcloseconnectionbetweentheinherentrequirementsofthePosition,asdiscussedabove,andtheterminationofMrAW’semployment.
53. Thefollowingmattersarerelevanttothisassessment.
(i) Nature of criminal record including any custodial sentence
54. ThereisnodoubtthattheoffenceswhichMrAWwasconvictedofwereseriousoffences.HewasfoundguiltyonsixcountsofsellingtheClassBcontrolleddrugMDMA,inrelationtooneparticulardrugoperationinNewZealand.
55. ClassBreferstooneoftheclassesinaclassificationsystemwhichisbasedonthedrug’sprojectedriskofseriousharmorlossoflife.15ClassAisaclassificationfordrugswhichposea‘veryhighriskofharm’.ClassBisaclassificationfordrugswhichposea‘highriskofharm’.16 AsdiscussedbytheJudgesentencingMrAW:
[D]rugoffendingisregardedseriouslyinthiscountry.Theuseofdrugscomesatanenormouscost,bothintermsoflivesandfamiliesruined…andmoneylostfromthelocalcommunitythroughlostproductivityandthehugeamountsofcashdrainedoutofitforthebenefitofdrugdealers.
56. However,MrAW’sinvolvementinthedrugoperationwasnotatthehigherlevels.TheSentencingJudgeobservedthatMrAW’s‘culpabilitywasatalowerlevel’andhewassentencedonthatbasis.
57. Anon-custodialsentencewasimposedof12months’homedetention.Theprincipalreasonanon-custodialsentencewasimposedwasbecauseofMrAW’smedicalcondition,discussedatparagraph61below.
58. InotethatMrAWhasnopatternofcriminaloffending.IunderstandthatMrAWhassomeminorpriorconvictionsbuttheyarenowold.
14
(ii) Circumstances surrounding offending
59. MrAWhasstatedthattheconvictionaroseinhispersonallifeandinvolvedhimexercisingverypoorjudgement.
60. InsentencingMrAW,theJudgeacceptedthathisinvolvementindrugdealingwasnotforfinancialgain.HisHonouralsoacceptedthatMrAW’s‘involvementindrugswasoutofcharacter[and]amassiveerrorofjudgment’.
61. OneofthefactorswhichcontributedtoMrAW’sinvolvementinthedrugscenewashismedicalcondition,beingarareformofimmunedeficiencydisorder.AsstatedbytheSentencingJudge:
Theimmunologistwhohastreatedyousince1987hasprovidedareport.Itseemsthatyouareoneoftheoldestsurvivorsintheworldofthiscondition.Worldwidetherearecurrentlyonlythreesurvivorsovertheageof40andnoneovertheageof50.…
Itisverylikelythatyourlifeexpectancymayonlybeanothertenyearsorso.Itis,Iaccept,likelythatthisknowledgewhichhastohavebeenasignificantburdenforyouthroughoutyourlifecontributedtoyourinvolvementinthedrugscene.
(iii) Character references and professional reputation at the time of conviction
62. InsentencingMrAW,theSentencingJudgefoundasfollows:Youhavethroughoutyouradultlifeshownyourselftobeafinememberofthecommunity.Youhavehadagoodeducationandgoodemployment.Yourworkcolleagues,employersandclientsalike,haveprovidedcharacterreferencesthatspeaknotonlyofyourtechnicalskillbuthonesty,reliabilityandtrustworthinessinyourworkcontext.Atthetimeofyouroffendingyouhelddownaveryresponsibleandwell-paidposition.…Inyourpersonallifeyouhaveshownyourselftobeacaringandsupportivefriendandonepreparedtoproviderealandsignificanthelptothoseinneed.Therearemanystrongcharacterreferencesthatattesttoyourkindness,empathytowardsothersandpreparednesstostepinandshoulderresponsibility.
Particularlyprominentamongstthosewhohavespokenforyouaretheco-ownersoftheleakybuildingcomplexinwhichyouwereanownerandthechairmanofthebodycorporate.Thoseotherownershavespokenofthehundredsofhoursofpersonaltimeyouhavedevotedtoco-ordinatingthelitigationandremediationworkthatwasneededandhelpingyourco-ownersthroughthestressofallthat.Inshort,youhaveshownyourselftobeaworthymemberofsociety.
63. Inote,particularly,HisHonour’sacknowledgementthatMrAWwashonest,reliableandtrustworthyinhisprofessionalcapacity,beingaviewwhichwasalsoheldbyMrAW’sformercolleagues,employersandclientsalike.
(iv) Time since conviction and risk of re-offending
64. Theconvictionisrelativelyrecent,datingbacktoOctober2011.
65. Idonote,however,theSentencingJudge’sassessmentthat‘thereisnosignificantriskof[MrAW]re-offending.’
5 Consideration
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 15
(v) Assessment
66. Thisisafinelybalancedcase.Theoffenceisaveryseriousone.ThereisacloseproximitybetweentheconvictionandMrAW’semploymentwithData#3.Itisdifficultinthecircumstancestoobtainevidenceofrehabilitationinthisshortperiodoftime.Moreover,thePositionMrAWheldatData#3wasaseniorrolepositionedtostrongcandidateswhoarerequiredtodemonstratetherequisitelevelofprofessionalismandintegrity.
67. Ontheotherhand,MrAW’scasehassomeverypersuasivemitigatingfactors.Althoughitwasaseriousoffence,MrAW’sculpabilitywasatalowerlevel.MrAWdoesnothaveapatternofcriminalbehaviour.TheSentencingJudgefoundthattheoffencewasoutofcharacter,amassiveerrorofjudgmentandthereisnosignificantriskofre-offending.TheJudgealsofoundthathisinvolvementintheoffencewasnotforfinancialgain.MrAW’sclientsandcolleagueshaveattestedtohistechnicalskillaswellashishonesty,reliabilityandtrustworthinessinaworkcontext,beingcharacterreferenceswhichwereacceptedbytheCourtinsentencing.
MrAWhasservedhissentenceofhomedetentionandendeavouredtomoveforwardwithhislifeandcareer.
68. Onbalance,andwiththeabovefactorsinmind,IamnotpersuadedthatthereisasufficientlytightorclosecorrelationbetweentheinherentrequirementsofthePositionandtheexclusionofMrAW.IamnotpersuadedthatMrAWwasunabletoperformtheinherentrequirementsofthePosition.
6 Recommendations69. Where,afterconductinganinquiry,theCommissionfindsthatanactorpracticeengagedin
byarespondentconstitutesdiscrimination,theCommissionisrequiredtoservenoticeontherespondentsettingoutitsfindingsandreasonsforthosefindings.17TheCommissionmayincludeanyrecommendationforpreventingarepetitionoftheactoracontinuationofthepractice.18
70. TheCommissionmayalsorecommend:
• thepaymentofcompensationto,orinrespectof,apersonwhohassuffereddamage;and
• thetakingofotheractiontoremedyorreducethelossordamagesufferedbyaperson.19
16
6.1 Mr AW’s submissions71. MrAWhasaskedmetomakearecommendationthatData#3payhimanamountof
$135,362.50incompensationforthelossanddamagehehassufferedasaresultofData#3’sdiscrimination.MrAWprovidedthefollowingbreakdowninsupportofhissubmission:
Lossofearnings
• Theamountof$92,862.50representssixmonths’lossofearnings.
• IwasterminatedfrommyemploymentatData#3on17January2014.Mycontractofemploymentsetoutmyontargetearningsatthattimeat$185,725perannum(inclsuper).
• Despiteworkinghardtoendeavourtomitigatemylossduringthattimebyapplyingforjobs,bothatthesamelevelandlessthanmycurrentlevelofexpertiseasanITprofessional,Iwasnotabletosecurepaidemploymentforaperiodofsixmonths.
• On30July2014,ImanagedtosecureatemporarycontractpositionasBusinessAnalystwithPM-PartnersGroupatafixedrateof$750perday.Thiswasnotapermanentposition,buthaditbeen,itwouldbeequivalenttoanannualsalarylessthanmyannualrateofpayatData#3.
• On10November2014,IcommencedemploymentwithReadifywithontargetearningsof$169,300perannum.
Legalexpenses
• Theamountof$2,500representsthelegalexpensesIhaveincurredinrelationtotheterminationofmyemploymentatData#3andthiscomplaint.
• AspreviouslyidentifiedtotheCommission,Data#3hashadthebenefitofitsin-houselegalcounseldealingwiththismatter.Asaresult,Ihavebeenforcedtotakemyownlegaladvicetoaddressthiscomplaint.
Damagetomyprofessionalreputationandstanding
• Theamountof$20,000representsdamagetomyprofessionalreputationandstandingintheITindustry.
• AspreviouslyidentifiedtotheCommission,IamveryconcernedthatstafffromData#3havesoughttointerferewithmyprofessionalreputationbyspreadingrumourandgossipaboutmycriminalconvictionsinanattempttodiscreditmewithintheITindustry.InaboutJune2014,IwasinformedthatawrittenofferofemploymentforajobIappliedforwasbeing“typedup”anditwas,withoutexplanation,withdrawn.IamawareofothergossipandinnuendothatexistsamongstmypeerswhohavenotbeenmadeawareofmypastcriminalconvictionbymeandnowappeartocastdoubtsaboutmyITabilitiesonthatbasis.IamveryconcernedthatData#3,inanattempttojustifytheirpositioninrelationtothiscomplaint,havesoughttoinvolvepeopleinthismatterwhowereunconnectedtothedecisiontoterminatemyemployment.…
Damageforhurt,humiliationanddistress
• Theamountof$20,000representsdamageforhurt,humiliationanddistress.
• WhileIhavemaintainedmyinnocenceofthecrime,IaccepttheconvictionwhichwasrecordedandIhaveservedthesentenceimposedonme.Itwasadreadfulandentirelyoutofcharacterperiodofmypersonallife,asnotedbythesentencingjudge.
6 Recommendations
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 17
• IhavebeendoggedbyData#3’sdecisiontoterminatemyemploymentonthebasisofmypastcriminalrecord.Thehumiliationofunemploymenthasaffectedmyrelationshipswithmyfamilyandfriends.Ithascausedmegreatpersonaldistressandembarrassment.
• InthetimeIwasunemployedfromJanuary2014throughJuly2014Ihadtorelyonmyfamilyandfriendsforfinancialsupport.Thiscomesafteranextendedperiodofstressformyfamilyandclosefriends.Ihadnootherformofincomeduringthisperiodanddidnotrelyongovernmentassistanceduringthistime.
6.2 Data#3’s submissions72. Data#3chosenottomakeanydetailedsubmissionsonthequestionofrecommendation.
Itsubmittedthat‘Data#3isnotunderanylegalobligationtopay[MrAW]anycompensationandwillnotdoso.’
6.3 Consideration of compensation73. Inconsideringtheassessmentofarecommendationforcompensationincasesofthistype,
theFederalCourthasindicatedthattortprinciplesfortheassessmentofdamagesshouldbeapplied.20Iamoftheviewthatthisistheappropriateapproachtotakeinrelationtothepresentmatter.Forthisreason,sofarasispossibleinthecaseofarecommendationforcompensation,theobjectshouldbetoplacetheinjuredpartyinthesamepositionasifthewronghadnotoccurred.21
(a) Hurt, humiliation and distress
74. CompensationforMrAW’shurt,humiliationanddistresswould,intortlaw,becharacterisedas‘non-economicloss’.Thereisnoobviousmonetaryequivalentforsuchlossandcourtsthereforestrivetoachievefairratherthanfullorperfectcompensation.22
75. IamsatisfiedthatMrAWsufferedhurt,humiliationanddistressasaresultofbeingdiscriminatedagainstonthebasisofhiscriminalrecord.IacceptthatthehumiliationoflosinghisjobatData#3hascausedhimpersonaldistressandembarrassmentandhasnegativelyimpactedrelationshipswithfamilyandfriends.
76. Inallthecircumstances,Iconsideranawardofmonetarycompensationforhurt,humiliationanddistressintheamountof$5,000isappropriate.IthereforerecommendthatData#3payhim that amount.
(b) Reputational and professional damage
77. MrAWsubmittedthat:Data#3havesoughttointerferewithmyprofessionalreputationbyspreadingrumourandgossipaboutmycriminalconvictionsinanattempttodiscreditmewithintheITindustry.
78. Inotethatintheabsenceofanyspecificdetailsorevidence,Iamnotabletodrawanyconclusions about such a submission.
18
79. MrAWhasalsosubmittedthat:InaboutJune2014,IwasinformedthatawrittenofferofemploymentforajobIappliedforwasbeing“typedup”anditwas,withoutexplanation,withdrawn.Iamawareofothergossipandinnuendothatexistsamongstmypeerswhohavenotbeenmadeawareofmypastcriminalconvictionbyme…
80. ThereisnoevidencebeforetheCommissionthatData#3hadaroletoplayinthisincident.Iamunabletodrawanyconclusionastowhatmayhaveoccurred.
(c) Legal expenses
81. WhileapersonmayreasonablywishtoobtainlegaladviceinconnectionwithacomplaintofdiscriminationtotheCommission,theCommission’sproceduredoesnotrequirethis.Moreover,CommissioninquiriesunderDivision4oftheAHRCActareinnowayakintoa‘costsjurisdiction’,whereitisageneralprinciplethat‘costsfollowtheevent’.
82. Forthisreason,IdonotrecommendanycompensationforMrAW’slegalexpensesofbringingthis complaint.
(d) Economic loss
83. Themeasureofdamagesforeconomiclossinwrongfuldismissalcasesisprimafacie,theamountthattheclaimantwouldhaveearnedhadtheemploymentcontinuedaccordingtothecontractsubjecttoadeductioninrespectofanyamountaccruingfromanyotheremploymentwhichtheclaimant,inminimisingdamages,eitherhadobtainedorshouldreasonablyhaveobtained.23
(i) The amount Mr AW would have earned under the contract
84. MrAW’sremunerationpackageunderhiscontractwithData#3wasexpressedasfollows:
Basesalaryperannum $ 150,000.00
VariableReward(VR) VR2–60/40splitlocalvnationalRevenue performanceactualvbudget $ 15,000.00
VR3–BasedonachievementofroleKPI’s $ 5,000.00
Superannuation $ 15,725.00
ONTARGETEARNINGS $ 185,725.00
85. While$165,725.00wastheamountMrAWwouldhaveearnedunderthecontractasaminimum,afurther$20,000wascontingentonMrAW’sperformanceinthePosition,includinghisfinancialperformanceandhismanager’sassessmentofhisperformanceagainstthePosition’s‘keyperformanceindicators’(KPIs).
6 Recommendations
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 19
86. Indeterminingwhether,onthebalanceofprobabilities,MrAWwouldhaveearnedthis‘variablereward’,Iamfacedwithtwodifficulties:
• NeitherpartymadeanysubmissionsorsubmittedanyevidenceonthelikelihoodofMrAWearningabonus;and
• AnysubmissionsonthispointwouldhavebeenbasedonMrAW’sperformanceinthePositionoverthecourseoftwoweeksthathewasemployed.
87. ThereisinsufficientevidenceformetoconcludethatMrAWwouldhaveearneda‘variablereward’atall.Accordingly,IconcludethathadMrAWremainedinemploymentwithData#3,hewouldhaveearnedasalaryof$165,725perannum.Hisgrossearningsfrom4February2014to11December2015,wouldhavebeenapproximately$307,547.
(ii) The amount Mr AW has earned in alternative employment
88. MrAWsecuredalternativeemploymenton30July2014.ThiswasapositionasBusinessAnalystwithPM-PartnersGroupatafixedrateof$750perday.MrAWwasinthisroleforapproximatelya14weekperiodfrom30July2014,untilhecommencedhisroleatReadifyon10November2014.Ihaveestimated,ontheevidencebeforeme,thattheamountMrAWwouldhaveearnedduringthisperiodisapproximately$52,500.
89. On10November2014,MrAWcommencedemploymentwithReadifywith‘ontargetearnings’of$169,300perannum.Atthatrate,from10November2014to11December2015,IhaveestimatedthatMrAWwouldhaveearnedapproximately$183,408.
90. Intotal,since4February2014,MrAW’searningswereapproximately$235,908.
(iii) Duty to mitigate
91. Atcommonlaw,thefailureofaclaimanttotakestepstomitigateaclaimedlossmayberaisedasadefencetoaclaim.AlthoughData#3hasnotraisedthispointinrelationtoMrAW’sdiscriminationcomplaint,Ihavenonethelessassessedwhetherhehascompliedwithhisdutytomitigateloss.
92. Thecourtshaveacceptedthefollowingprinciples,asanaccuratestatementofthelawconcerningmitigation.
(i)Thelawdisallowsrecoveryofdamagesinrespectofanylossthatcouldhavebeenavoidedbutwhichtheplaintiffhasfailedtoavoidthroughunreasonableactionorinaction.
(ii)Theplaintiffmayrecoverlossorexpenseincurredinareasonableattempttomitigate.
(iii)Theplaintiffmaynotrecoverlossinfactavoided,eventhoughdamagesforthatlosswouldhavebeenrecoverablebecausetheeffortsthatwenttomitigationwentbeyondwhatwasrequiredoftheplaintiffunderthefirstprinciple.24
93. Thus,itbecomesnecessarytoconsiderwhetherthestepstakenbyMrAWtomitigatehisloss,beinglossofremuneration,werea‘reasonableattempt’inthecircumstances.
20
94. Insupportofhisclaim,MrAWsubmittedtotheCommissionadocumentwhichhegeneratedfromtheworksearchwebsite,www.seek.com.au(Seek),whichsetsoutdetailsofjobapplicationshesubmittedthroughSeekintheperiodJanuary–June2014.Intotal,MrAWmade117jobapplicationsinthisperiod.Itisunnecessaryformetosetoutalltherolesheappliedfor,howeverInotethefollowingselection:
Application Date Job Title Advertiser
29/01/2014 SolutionsArchitect(SupportServices)–MacquariePark
UXC
17/02/2014 ITInfrastructureLead McDonald’s
28/02/2014 ProjectManager–DataCentreMigration
Radius Solutions Group
3/03/2014 SolutionsArchitect GWGPartners
13/03/14 SeniorInfrastructure,SystemsEngineer EcareerEmploymentServices
4/04/2014 TechnicalLead–SolutionDesigner EnterpriseITResourcesPtyLtd
17/04/2014 SeniorBusinessDevelopmentManager–ITManagedServicesandSolutions
CubicResources
30/04/2014 PresalesMicrosoftSolutionArchitect GreenLightAustraliaPtyLtd
7/05/2014 TechnicalConsultant MACRORecruitment
9/05/2014 InfrastructureSolutionArchitect/Designer
BluefinResourcesPtyLimited
15/05/2014 ITManager TalentInternational
6 Recommendations
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 21
Application Date Job Title Advertiser
10/06/2014 ITManager FrontlineRetail–Executive
13/06/2014 MicrosoftPracticeManger/MicrosoftSolutionArchitect
HigherRecruitmentP/L
23/06/2014 PreSalesSolutionArchitect PerigonGroupPtyLimited
23/06/2014 EnterpriseITSalesExecutive OakstoneBridgeConsulting
95. InoteMrAW’ssubmissionthatthejobsheappliedforrangedinseniorityintheITindustryandinlevelsofpay.WhiletheSeeklistMrAWprovideddidnot,forthemostpart,indicatesalarylevel,someofthejobswerelistedatasalarylevelofapproximately$80,000perannum,significantlybelowMrAW’ssalaryatData#3.
96. IhavereflectedondiscriminationcaselawtoassessMrAW’seffortsatmitigatinghisloss,setoutabove.Whiletherearenohardorfastrulesregardinghowmanyjobsonemustapplyforinareasonableattempttomitigateone’sloss,itisclearthat117jobapplicationsinone’sprofessionalfield,inapproximately180daysofunemployment,isareasonableeffort.
97. IconcludethatMrAW’sattemptstosecurealternativeemploymentfollowingterminationbyData#3werenotunreasonableandthathehasthereforecompliedwithhisdutytomitigatehisloss.
98. IthereforecalculateMrAW’seconomiclossasfollows:
AmounthewouldhaveearnedunderthecontractwithData#3 $ 307,547Amountheearnedinalternativeemployment $ 235,908Economicloss $ 71,639
99. IrecommendthatData#3payMrAWanamountfortheeconomiclosshehasincurredwhilemakingareasonableattempttomitigatehisloss.InotethatitisstandardpracticeforcourtsandtribunalsinAustraliatocalculatepastlossofwagesbyusinggrossfigures,astheactualpaymentoftaxationonanycompensationwhichrelatestolostearningsisamatterforthetaxpayer.25
22
6.4 Consideration of Data#3’s policies and training100. Aspartofthisinquiry,IhaveconsideredData#3’sdiscriminationpolicies.InitsResponse
toMrAW’scomplaint,Data#3providedacopyofitsVision,Strategy&CodeofConductGuidelines.Thisdocumentdoesnothaveasectionspecificallyaddressingnon-discriminationintheworkplace.However,undertheheading‘RespectandTrust’itstatesasfollows:
Respect and Trust
Treatingallotherswithrespectandtrustisessentialtobuildingthepersonalandprofessionalrelationshipsthatweneedtooperateeveryday.Weareexpectedtotreatallpeoplewedealwith,withdignityandrespect,regardlessoftheirpositionorcircumstances.…
What are some examples of showing respect and trust to others?
...
—Neverdiscriminateagainst,harassorbullyfellowData#3teammembers,customersorvendors.Apartfrombeingdisrespectful,itisillegal.
101. On22April2015,aspartofthisinquiry,Data#3wasaskedwhetherithadanyotherworkplacepolicieswhichaddressedworkplacediscrimination.Data#3respondedbyprovidingacopyofitsHarassment,Discrimination&VictimisationGuideline(DiscriminationGuideline)whichismarkedwith‘©2015Data#3Limited’.ItappearsthatthisDiscriminationGuidelinecameintoexistencesometimein2015,afterMrAW’scomplaintofdiscriminationtotheCommission.
102. Relevantly,page3oftheDiscriminationGuidelineprovidesasfollows:Discrimination
Discriminationisanypracticethatmakesdistinctionbetweenindividualsorgroupssoastodisadvantagesomeandadvantageothers.
Harassmentonanyofthesegroundsisaformofdiscrimination:
– race,colour,descentornationalorethnicorigin; – sex,maritalstatus,pregnancy,familyorcarerresponsibilities,breastfeeding – medicalrecord,disabilityorimpairment – sexualpreferenceorgenderidentity – religion,criminalrecord,politicalbelieforactivity,ortradeunionactivity – age
103. TheDiscriminationGuidelinegoesontoaddresswhatisdirectdiscrimination,indirectdiscriminationandvictimisationandData#3’spolicyforhowtodealwithanydiscriminationorharassmentcomplaints.Itstatesthat:
Ifanemployeefeelsthattheirrightshavebeenbreached,theyshouldimmediatelyspeaktotheirmanager/supervisororcontacttheGeneralManagerofOD&HR.Allcomplaintswillbetakenseriouslyandhandledpromptly,confidentiallyandimpartiallyinaccordancewithData#3’sComplaintsandInvestigationsGuidelines.
104. IconsiderthatData#3’sdevelopmentofaDiscriminationGuidelineisapositivedevelopment.However,withregardtocriminalrecorddiscrimination,theDiscriminationGuidelineprovidesinsufficientguidanceastowhatitisandhowdecisionmakinginrelationtojobapplicantswithacriminalrecordwillbeundertaken.
6 Recommendations
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 23
105. IrecommendthatData#3furtherdevelopitspoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationonthebasisofcriminalrecord.Inthisregard,IdrawData#3’sattentiontotheCommission’spublication On the Record: Guidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of Criminal Record (Guidelines).26
106. TheGuidelinesstate:9. A written policy and procedure
Ifanemployerdecidesthatacriminalrecordisrelevanttothepositionsofaworkplace,awrittenpolicycanhelpensurethatallstaffhaveanunderstandingoftheorganisation’srequirementsandthelegalobligationsoftheorganisationtowardspeoplewithacriminalrecord.Apolicyandanoutlineofprocedurecanbeincorporatedintootherworkplacepolicyonequalopportunityandanti-discriminationifsuchpolicyexists.
Ideally,apolicyandprocedurewouldinclude:
• astatementabouttheemployer’scommitmenttotreatingpeoplewithacriminalrecordfairlyandinaccordancewithanti-discrimination,spentconvictionandprivacylaws
• abriefsummaryofemployeeandemployerrightsandresponsibilitiesundertheselaws,orinclusionofup-to-dateliteraturewhichprovidesthisinformation
• anoutlineofotherrelevantlegalrequirementsfortheworkplace,suchastheemployer’sresponsibilitiesunderlicensingandregistrationlaws,orworkingwithchildrenlaws
• theprocedureforassessingtheinherentrequirementsoftheposition,requestingcriminalrecordinformationifnecessaryandassessingindividualjobapplicationsoremployeehistories
• informationoninternalorexternalcomplaintorgrievanceproceduresifsomeonethinkstheyhavebeenunfairlytreated
• designatedofficerswithresponsibilityfordifferentelementsoftheprocedure,
Inorderforapolicytogainwidespreadacceptance,itisvitalthatstaff,workplacerepresentativesandmanagementareinvolvedinthedevelopmentofthepolicy.
Developingappropriatepoliciesandproceduresdoesnothavetobeoverlycomplexorlong.However,anypolicyshouldbeclear,informativeandavailabletoallstaffandjobapplicants.
107. IalsorecommendthatData#3conducttrainingforitshumanresourcesandmanagementstaffinvolvedinemploymentdecisions.Thistrainingshouldassiststafftoassessfairlywhetheranindividualwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.Again,IdrawData#3’sattentiontotheGuidelines,whichstateasfollows:
5.10 Assessing a job applicant’s criminal record against the inherent requirements of the job
Insomecases,theconnectionbetweenthecriminalrecordandthejobwillbeclearenoughfortheemployertodecideonthesuitabilityoftheapplicantforthejob…
However,in most cases itwillbeuncleartotheemployersimplyonthebasisoftheresultsofapolicecheckalonewhetherornottheconvictionoroffenceisrelevanttotheinherentrequirementsofthejob…
24
Anemployerwillgenerallyneedtodiscusstherelevanceofthecriminalrecordwiththejobapplicant,orinvitethemtoprovidefurtherinformation,inordertoassesswhetherthepersoncanmeettheinherentrequirementsofthejob.
…
Thetypeofinformationwhichanemployermayneedtoconsiderwhenassessingtherelevanceofaperson’scriminalrecordincludes:
• theseriousnessoftheconvictionoroffenceanditsrelevancetothejobinquestion
• whetherinrelationtotheoffencetherewasafindingofguiltwithoutconviction,whichindicatesalessseriousviewoftheoffencebythecourts
• theageoftheapplicantwhentheoffenceoccurred
• thelengthoftimesincetheoffenceoccurred
• whethertheapplicanthasapatternofoffences
• thecircumstancesinwhichtheoffencetookplace,forexampleifitwasanoffencethattookplaceinawork,domesticorpersonalcontext
• whethertheapplicant’scircumstanceshavechangedsincetheoffencewascommitted…
• whethertheoffencewasdecriminalisedbyParliament…
• theattitudeofthejobapplicanttotheirpreviousoffendingbehaviour
• referencesfrompeoplewhoknowabouttheoffendinghistory.27
108. IalsodrawData#3’sattentiontoPart4oftheGuidelines,whichdiscusses(amongothermatters)howanemployershoulddeterminewhetheracriminalrecordisrelevanttotheinherentrequirementsofajobandkeyprinciplesincaselawforassessingtheinherentrequirements.
7 Response to recommendations109. On15December2015IprovidedanoticetoData#3unders29(2)(a)oftheAHRCActsetting
outmyfindingsandrecommendationsinrelationtothecomplaint.
110. Byemaildated8January2016Data#3providedthefollowingresponsetomyfindingsandrecommendations:
Data#3appreciatesthetimetakenbytheCommissioninreviewinganddecidingonthismatter.Wehavereviewedtherecommendationsandhaveoutlinedtheactionstobetakenbelow.
1.Developworkplacepoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationofemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecord.
Data#3willreviewtherecommendedreporttitled“OntheRecord:GuidelinesforthePreventionofDiscriminationinEmploymentontheBasisofCriminalRecord”anddevelopaworkplacepolicytobeusedinpreventingdiscriminationonthebasisofcriminalrecordinthefuture.FurtherreviewswillbeconductedontheexistingWorkplaceHarassment,DiscriminationandVictimisationPolicytoensurethatitcontainsappropriatemeasurestocomplementthisnewpolicy.Relevantworkplacerepresentativesandmanagerswillbeinvolvedinthecreationofthispolicyandonceratified,itwillbemadeavailabletoallstaff.
6 Recommendations
AW v Data#3 • [2016] AusHRC 105 • 25
2.Conducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.
Oncetherecommendedpolicyrelatingtothepreventionofdiscriminationof[sic]employmentonthebasisofcriminalrecordhasbeencreatedandratified,Data#3willusethispolicytorollouttrainingtorelevantstaffonhowtofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.Thistrainingwillalsobeincorporatedintotheinductionprogramsothatitwillbeundertakenbyallrelevantincomingstaff.
3.PayMrAWanamountincompensationforlossofearnings,causedbytheterminationofhisemployment.
4.PayMrAW$5,000incompensationforhurt,humiliationanddistressasaresultofbeingdiscriminatedagainst.
Forthefollowingreasons,Data#3respectfullydeclinestopayanycompensationtoMrAW,eitherthesumrecommendedbytheCommissionorotherwise:
• Data#3waslegallyentitledtoterminatehisemploymentwithintheprobationaryperiod.
• MrAW’srecentandseriouscriminalconvictionwouldpreventhim,onareasonableassessment,fromperformingtheinherentrequirementsofhisrole.
111. IreportaccordinglytotheAttorney-General.
Yourssincerely
GillianTriggsPresidentAustralianHumanRightsCommission
March2016
26
1 Australian Human Rights Commission Regulations 1989 (Cth),reg4(a)(iii).2 State of Victoria v Macedonian Teachers’ Association of Victoria Inc(1999)91FCR47.3 X v Commonwealth (1999)200CLR177,222-223,[146](KirbyJ);Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie (1998)193CLR280,333,[152.4]
andfootnotes168-169(KirbyJ).ThisapproachhasbeenappliedtoPartII,Division4oftheSex Discrimination Act 1984 in Gardner v All Australian Netball Association Limited (2003)197ALR28,[19],[23]-[24](RaphaelFM);Ferneley v Boxing Authority of New South Wales (2001)191ALR739,[89](WilcoxJ).
4 Qantas Airways v Christie(1998)193CLR280,294[34](GaudronJ).5 X v Commonwealth(1999)200CLR177,208[102](GummowandHayneJJ).6 X v Commonwealth (1999)200CLR177,[43](McHughJ).7 InternationalLabourOrganisation,General Survey: Equality in Employment and Occupation,(1988),[126].SeealsoQantas
Airways Ltd v Christie (1998)193CLR280,[72](McHughJ).8 Qantas Airways v Christie (1998)193CLR280,284.9 AustralianHumanRightsCommission,On the Record: Guidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the
Basis of Criminal Record(2012),16<http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/human_rights/criminalrecord/on_the_record/download/otr_guidelines.pdf>.
10 Above,22.11 (1998)158ALR468.12 Above,482.13 (1999)95FCR218.14 Above,235-236.15 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 (NewZealand),s3A.16 Above.17 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth),s35(2)(a).18 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth),s35(2)(b).19 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth),s35(2)(c).20 Peacock v Commonwealth (2000)104FCR464,483(WilcoxJ).21 SeeHall v A & A Sheiban Pty Limited (1989)20FCR217,239(LockhartJ).22 Sharman v Evans (1977)138CLR563,589(GibbsandStephenJJ).23 SeeHarveyMcGregor,McGregor on Damages (2014,19thed),1113;NeilRees,KatherineLindsayandSimonRice,Australian
Anti-Discrimination Law(2008),707-709.24 JudicialCommissionofNewSouthWales,Civil Trial Bench Book (2015),7055<http://jirs.judcom.nsw.gov.au/public/wservice/
benchbooks/docs/Civil_Trials_Bench_Book-Update_29-November_2015.pdf>.25 NeilRees,KatherineLindsayandSimonRice,Australian Anti-Discrimination Law(2008),711.26 AustralianHumanRightsCommission,On the Record: Guidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the
Basis of Criminal Record(2012),<http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/human_rights/criminalrecord/on_the_record/download/otr_guidelines.pdf>.
27 Above,14-19.
Endnotes
Further Information
Australian Human Rights Commission
Level 3, 175 Pitt StreetSYDNEY NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218SYDNEY NSW 2001Telephone: (02) 9284 9600
Complaints Infoline: 1300 656 419General enquiries and publications: 1300 369 711TTY: 1800 620 241Fax: (02) 9284 9611Website: www.humanrights.gov.au
For detailed and up to date information about the Australian Human Rights Commission visit our website at: www.humanrights.gov.au
To order more publications from the Australian Human Rights Commission download a Publication Order Form at: www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/index.html or call: (02) 9284 9600 fax: (02) 9284 9611 or email: [email protected]
Australian Human Rights Commissionwww.humanrights.gov.au