Skip to main content

Conciliation Register

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Pregnancy
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Compensation

Policy – anti discrimination/EEO Policy developed

Amount $3,650
Year

The complainant was employed on a casual basis as a driver for a goods transport company. She alleged that when her partner told the operations manager that she was pregnant, he said words to the effect that "we can't have pregnant chicks working here" and she was not offered any more work.

 

The company denied that the alleged statement was made and said the complainant was not offered work because there was no work available that met her requirements with regard to hours of work and type of vehicle used.

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the company pay the complainant $3,650 as an Employee Termination Payment and develop a workplace anti-discrimination policy.

 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Apology (private)

Compensation

Training - anti-discrimination/EEO training introduced

Amount $12,800
Year

The complainant has a spinal cord injury and uses an electric wheelchair. The complainant said he booked a flight with the respondent airline and was informed that, in accordance with its policies, airline staff would assist him to transfer from his wheelchair to his seat on the plane. The complainant alleged that on arriving to board the flight, he was informed staff could not assist him to transfer to his seat and he was therefore unable to board the flight, as he is unable to transfer independently from his wheelchair. 

 

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

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the airline reimburse the complainant for his out-of-pocket expenses associated with the flight, including travel to and from the airport. The airline also agreed to pay the complainant $12,000 as general damages. The airline agreed to write to the complainant apologising for the incident and undertook to deliver disability awareness training to staff, as well as training on assisting passengers to transfer from a wheelchair to the seat. 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Accommodation
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Other

Year

The complainant’s son is eight years of age and has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, learning difficulties and sensory processing difficulties. The complainant alleged the respondent government public housing provider placed her and her son in unsuitable accommodation. In particular, she claimed the home was too crowded and did not offer enough space to set up occupational therapy equipment needed to manage her son’s disability. 

 

On being notified of the complaint, the public housing provider indicated a willingness to participate in conciliation to try to resolve the complaint. 

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant enter a lease for a larger home and receive $2,000 credit into their rental account. 

 

 

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Sexual harassment
Sexual orientation
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Compensation

Statement of service

Amount $10,045
Year

The complainant is gay. She was employed for three months with the respondent sports governing body. The complainant alleged that a colleague made comments about gay women which made her uncomfortable in the workplace including that playing the sport “will make you gay”, that gay women are more likely to have psychological issues and display predatory behaviours and that he would prefer that his children not be gay. The complainant also alleged another colleague made a comment of a sexual nature about a female celebrity and told her he did not want to be in a relationship because he “liked lots of girls”, which make the complainant uncomfortable. The complainant said she resigned and reported her concerns internally.

 

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

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the sport governing body pay the complainant approximately $10,000 less applicable tax (the equivalent of 8 weeks' pay) and provide her with a statement of service.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Access to premises
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Policy change/Change in practice

Year

The complainant has osteoarthritis and uses lifts to accommodate resulting mobility difficulties. She alleged lifts at the respondent shopping centre were unavailable for an extended period, restricting her access to services on different levels.

 

On being notified of the complaint, the shopping centre indicated a willingness to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation.

 

The complaint was resolved with undertakings by the shopping centre to:

  • Meet with the complainant to discuss her concerns
  • Review its processes relating to regular monitoring of lifts, signage and customer feedback
  • Source spare lift parts from different suppliers as appropriate and negotiate regular timely maintenance of the lifts with the current supplier
  • Commission an independent review of the lifts.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Statement of regret (private)

Compensation

Amount $10,000
Year

The complainant has an acquired brain injury and was employed as a service officer in a government agency. The complainant said he advised the agency of his disability when he applied for the role and requested reasonable adjustments to accommodate his disability, particularly extra time to process information. He alleged the agency took over four months to provide him with adjustments and then terminated his employment.  

 

The government agency said the complainant did not provide information about his disability during the onboarding process and the doctor who performed the pre-employment medical examination did not recommend provision of any adjustments. The agency said that once it became aware of the complainant’s disability, it obtained additional medical information and developed an individual support plan which included provision of adjustments. The agency said it terminated the complainant’s employment because he failed to meet satisfactory standards of performance during the probationary period. 

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the agency pay the complainant $10,000, write to him expressing regret for his experience in relation to performance appraisal and convey his feedback to its human resources and other relevant teams. 

 

 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Associate
Disability
Areas Disability Standards
Education
Outcome details

Apology (private)

Compensation

Policy - anti-discrimination/EEO policy reviewed/revised

Policy change/Change in practice (external customers)

Policy change/Change in practice (staff)

Training - anti-discrimination/EEO training introduced

Amount $30,000
Year

The complainant's son is on the Autism Spectrum and has Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder, among other disabilities. He attended the respondent K-12 independent faith-based school. The complainant alleged the school did not take reasonable steps to assist her son to transition from Year 6 to Year 7 and failed to provide him with reasonable adjustments. She claimed this led to an escalation in behaviour by her son and alleged the school responded in a punitive way by suspending him on multiple occasions rather than appropriately accommodating his disability. The complainant also alleged the school treated her less favourably as a parent of a student with disability by not addressing her concerns and making her feel guilt and shame by discussing concerns raised by other parents about her son. The complainant advised she felt she had no option but to remove her son from the school. 

 

The respondent school denied discriminating against the complainant or her son but indicated a willingness to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation. 

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the school pay the complainant $30,000 as general damages and write to her and her family apologising for the hurt and distress they experienced as a result of the events giving rise to the complaint. The school also undertook to review its policies and procedures concerning supporting students with disability and behaviour management strategies more generally. Additionally, the school undertook to review training delivered to teachers to ensure appropriate training in supporting students with disability and behaviour support more generally. 

 

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Pregnancy
Areas Education
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Action ceased/Undertaking to cease an action

Revised terms and conditions

Year

The complainant was a student of the respondent vocational training body. She alleged the training body informed her that due to her pregnancy, she would not be permitted to participate in a module with potentially distressing content, and that she could not complete three mandatory practical components of the course until six months post-partum. 

 

On being advised of the complaint, the training body indicated a willingness to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation.

 

The complaint was resolved with an undertaking by the training body to change its policy to enable pregnant students to participate in the module that contained potentially distressing content subject to students signing a waiver confirming their awareness of the subject matter and potential for distress. The training body also undertook that while pregnant students would not be able to complete practical modules of the course in their last trimester for safety reasons, their ability to do so post-partum would be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Disability Standards
Education
Outcome details

Compensation

Amount $25,000
Year

The complainant’s six-year-old son has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder and developmental delay. The complainant alleged the respondent independent school did not allow her son to attend the first week of kindergarten because he may scare other children and then would only allow him to attend school for three hours per day. The complainant also alleged that the school did not accommodate her son’s disability in the classroom, did not make allowances for her son’s disability when applying disciplinary policy and did not develop an individual plan for her son. The complainant’s son was ultimately suspended and the complainant removed him from the school. 

 

On being notified of the complaint, the school denied unlawful discrimination but agreed to participate in conciliation.

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the school pay the complainant $25,000. The complainant agreed to take down negative social media content she had posted about the school.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Other

Year

The complainant has memory loss. He said he sought to import his mobile phone number with the respondent telecommunications provider to a different provider. He said he was unsuccessful because personal information held by the two providers did not match. The complainant alleged that when he contacted the respondent to address the issue, he was required to answer a number of personal questions to establish ownership of the account. As the complainant could not recall the answers to the questions, he was unable to establish ownership of the account. 

 

On being notified of the complaint, the telecommunications provider denied unlawful discrimination but agreed to participate in conciliation.

 

The complaint was resolved once the telecommunications provider established the complainant was the owner of the account. The provider agreed to offer the complainant a free one-year phone plan.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Disability Standards
Education
Outcome details

Compensation

Amount $30,000
Year

The complainant uses a wheelchair, is non-verbal and uses eye-gaze technology and hand-over-hand techniques. The complainant enrolled in a diploma with the respondent vocational education provider and an individual plan was developed setting out reasonable adjustments to be provided to the complainant. The complainant alleged the vocational education provider did not provide her all the agreed adjustments, required her to repeat tasks and assessments and did not give her feedback or results for her work. She said she felt she had no option but to withdraw from the diploma. 

 

The vocational education provider claimed it provided the complainant with support to accommodate her disability in accordance with the action plans developed in consultation with her and her support team, which was revised over time. The provider noted some competency concerns and said that some of the proposed adjustments were not agreed to as they were not 'reasonable' and, if adopted, may compromise the integrity of the course.  

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the vocational education provider pay the complainant $30,000. 

 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Family responsibilities
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Adjustments provided

Year

The complainant works as a software support officer at the respondent company. He said that his son has a learning disability, asthma and Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder and needs a lot of one-to-one support and tuition. He alleged the company denied his request for a small reduction in working hours a few days a week to enable him to attend appointments and that a manager told him 'this is not a child care' and that it would affect the productivity of the team. He alleged he was singled out and required to take breaks at specific times.

 

The company said the complainant’s request could not be accommodated due to operational requirements. The company denied the alleged comment and said that all staff were required to take breaks for health and safety reasons.

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant work from home for a set period. As the complainant would not need to travel to and from work, he would be able to take his son to appointments without changes to his working hours.

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Sex
Sexual harassment
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Apology 

Compensation

Amount $55,000
Year



The complainant was engaged in fly-in fly-out work for the respondent mining company. She alleged male team members and team leaders discriminated against her because of her sex and sexually harassed her, including by touching her buttocks, making comments of a sexual nature, and touching each other on the buttocks and penis. The complainant said she did not feel safe in the workplace and resigned because she felt she had no other option.

On being notified of the complaint, the mining company agreed to participate in conciliation.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the mining company pay the complainant $55,000 and write to her apologising for the events giving rise to the complaint.

 

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Gender identity
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details

Apology - Private 

Anti-discrimination/EEO training reviewed/revised

Year

The complainant is a transgender woman. She alleged that a staff member of the respondent supermarket told her she was not a woman and laughed at her for wearing a dress.

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

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the supermarket apologise to the complainant for the events giving rise to the complaint and take the opportunity to remind staff of their obligations to treat all customers with dignity and respect.

Act Sex Discrimination Act
Grounds Sex
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Revised terms and conditions

Year

The complainant worked for a community organisation and alleged that a volunteer stroked her arm and embraced her without her consent at a work event. She said she reported the incident to the organisation and the police. She said the organisation found that the volunteer had breached its Code of Conduct but allowed him to keep working with the organisation. She alleged the matter would have been handled differently if she had been a man.

The community organisation denied discriminating against the complainant but agreed to participate in conciliation.

The complaint was resolved. The community organisation undertook to educate staff on harassment, review its policies and procedures on responding to reports of harassment, and make clear announcements about any changes to policy or procedure. The organisation also undertook to take steps to improve the conduct of volunteers, including developing selection criteria for volunteers, updating the Code of Conduct for volunteers, properly briefing volunteers on their obligations under the Code of Conduct, and developing a process to addressed alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct by volunteers.