Skip to main content

Conciliation Register

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Assistance animal
Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Statement of regret - private
Year

The complainant has psychosocial disability and uses an assistance animal. She alleged she was directed to leave the respondent hotel because she was accompanied by her assistance dog.

 

The hotel claimed the complainant failed to provide evidence that her dog is an assistance animal.

 

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the hotel write to the complainant expressing regret for the distress the complainant experienced and welcoming her to attend the hotel with her assistance dog in future.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Assistance animal
Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Donation to charity; 
  • Named individual(s) to undertake anti-discrimination/EEO training 
Amount $250
Year

The complainant alleged the respondent taxi driver at a taxi rank refused to take his fare because he was accompanied by an assistance animal. 

The taxi driver said he did not take the complainant’s fare because it would mean he would be late for a pre-arranged booking.

The complaint was resolved through conciliation. The taxi driver had undergone training on discrimination and customer service and expressed regret for declining the complainant’s fare. The taxi driver agreed to make a $250 donation in the complainant’s name to a charity that assists people with assistance animals and provides training and awareness raising to the public. The taxi company agreed to consult the charity on suitable training materials for its drivers to increase awareness of appropriate conduct towards passengers with disability accompanied by assistance animals.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability aid
Disability
Areas Access to premises
Disability Standards
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Goods/services/facilities - revised terms and conditions; 
  • Anti-discrimination/EEO policy reviewed/revised; 
  • Statement of regret - private;
  • Anti discrimination/EEO training introduced
Year

The complainant uses a wheelchair. She alleged she had difficulty accessing the respondent retail outlet because aisles were obstructed by boxes, displays and decorations. She claimed when she raised the issue with the store manager she was treated in a disrespectful manner.

The retailer advised the complainant’s experience was an isolated incident and inconsistent with its policies. The retailer apologised to the complainant for her experience and indicated a willingness to participate in conciliation to try to resolve the complaint.

The complaint was resolved by conciliation with an undertaking that the retailer provide training to staff on appropriate stocking procedures and the need to maintain wheelchair accessible pathways in retail outlets. The retailer also undertook to remind staff of the need to respond to customer concerns in a professional manner and deliver training on the needs of customers with disability. Further, the retailer also undertook to deliver additional regular training and carry out regular audits to ensure its outlets comply with relevant accessibility policies and requirements. The manager referred to in the complaint was no longer employed by the retailer.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Disability Standards
Education
Outcome details
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Compensation; 
  • Education
Amount $5,000
Year

The complainant’s son has a rare chromosomal disorder and is non-ambulatory and non-verbal. She alleged the respondent private school declined her son’s application for enrolment on the basis that it considered his disability could not be accommodated in a mainstream environment.

The school denied any discrimination and indicated a willingness to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the school pay the complainant $5,000 as general damages. The school apologised to the complainant for her experience and agreed to convey the complainant’s concerns about the nature of communications between the school and parents seeking to enrol children with disability as a senior leadership meeting.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Assistance animal
Disability
Areas Accommodation
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Action taken against named individuals; 
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Complainant satisfied with response/information provided; Policy change/Change in practice (internal staff); 
  • Statement of regret - private; 
  • Named individual(s) to undertake anti-discrimination/EEO training 
Year

The complainant alleged the respondent real estate agent denied her access to a property because she was accompanied by an assistance dog.

The real estate company apologised to the complainant for her experience and expressed a desire to try to resolve the complaint by conciliation.

The complaint was resolved by conciliation. The real estate agent was counselled and attended anti-discrimination training. The company delivered training to its staff on their obligations towards people with disability and assistance animals, incorporating information and resources provided by the Commission.

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

Goods, services and facilities provided

Year

The complainant alleged the respondent local council failed to provide accessible parking at three local beaches.

The council advised it had recently introduced accessible parking at two of the beaches. The council advised accessible parking would be provided at the third beach as part of planned upgrades to parking facilities.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the council install bollards at the two beaches to ensure the accessible parking was accessible in line with Australian Standards.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability aid
Disability
Areas Access to premises
Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Access to premises provided; 
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Anti-discrimination/EEO training reviewed/revised
Year

The complainant was recovering from back surgery and used a walking frame. She attended the respondent hotel and said there was no accessible bathroom. The complainant said the cubicle was too narrow and so she had to leave her walking frame outside the cubicle. She claimed that, due to the lack of handrails in the cubicle, she was then unable to stand and became trapped in the cubicle. The complainant said her partner was able to assist her with the cubicle door open. The complainant alleged that when she raised the issue with a staff member she felt the staff member was dismissive of her experience. The complainant said she felt distressed and embarrassed by the incident.

The hotel owner advised the hotel is very old and the building is heritage listed, having undergone its last major refurbishment several decades ago. The hotel advised that it undergoes regular building inspections and the accessibility of toilet facilities has never been raised.

The complaint was resolved by conciliation. The hotel apologised to the complainant for her experience. The hotel undertook to install rails in at least one of the bathroom stalls for men and women and to explore the option of installing an accessible toilet should the hotel be refurbished in the future. The hotel also undertook to continue to talk to its staff about their responsibilities towards patrons with disability.

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

Goods/services/facilities - adjustments provided

Year

The complainant has a mobility disability and sought to park his car in an accessible parking spot at the respondent hotel’s car park. He claimed there was no accessible parking or courtesy parking for people with disability.

The hotel advised it did offer courtesy parking for people with disability but acknowledged the layout of the car park was confusing and that patrons may not easily identify accessible parking spots. The hotel undertook to update parking information on its website and to train frontline staff to assist patrons with disability requiring accessible parking.

The complainant considered the actions taken by the hotel resolved the complaint.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Disability Standards
Education
Outcome details
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Compensation;
  • Anti-discrimination/EEO policy developed
Amount $15,000
Year

The complainant’s daughter has Autism Spectrum Disorder and communication difficulties. The complainant alleged the respondent private school declined her daughter’s application for enrolment and would not provide adjustments to accommodate her daughter’s disability.

The school claimed it requested additional information about the complainant’s daughter’s disability, which was not provided. The school said it made the complainant’s daughter an offer of enrolment but this was not accepted before the offer expired.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the school write to the complainant expressing regret for the events giving rise to the complaint, pay her $15,000 and update its policies on the enrolment and support of students with disability.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Age
Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Goods/services/facilities - adjustments provided
  • Training provided - EEO/anti-discrimination (staff)
  • Compensation
Year

The complainant is 78 years of age and has a significant hearing impairment. He claimed the respondent cinema did not have the appropriate facilities to enable him to hear the film soundtrack. He claimed staff spoke to him abruptly and considered this may not have occurred if he was a younger person.

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

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the cinema:

  • Continue to improve facilities to enable access to film soundtracks by persons with impaired hearing, including headphones and infra-red technology
  • Explore emerging accessibility technology being trialled by other cinemas
  • Keep in contact with the complainant to offer updates and engage in consultation
  • Review staff training on the needs of customers with disability, using the complainant’s experience as a case study
  • Explore the possibility of re-screening the film the complainant wanted to see
  • Offer the complainant two free cinema tickets.

 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Assistance animal
Disability
Areas Goods, services and facilities
Outcome details
  • Apology - Private; 
  • Compensation
Amount $500
Year

The complainant has a vision impairment and is accompanied by a guide dog. He alleged that drivers engaged by the respondent ride-share company declined to drive him and his guide dog on multiple occasions. He claimed the drivers originally accepted his trip, but once he requested the passenger seat be moved forward to accommodate his guide dogs, the drivers rejected his trip and directed him to request a pet driver.

The rideshare company argued that the driver partners were not employees or agents of the company and that the driver partners had been provided with information about discrimination and accessibility.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the rideshare company pay the complainant $500 and write to him apologising for his experience.

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

Apology - Private; 

Compensation; 

Goods/services/facilities - other; 

Anti-discrimination/EEO policy reviewed/revised; 

Anti discrimination/EEO training introduced

Amount $5,000
Year

The complainant’s son has an assistance animal. The complainant and his family sought to dine at the respondent teppanyaki bar. The complainant alleged that the staff at the respondent restaurant told the family that they could only dine at an outside table due to the presence of the assistance animal. The complainant alleged that the restaurant staff then told the family they could sit inside but not at the grill because of the presence of the assistance animal.

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

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the restaurant write to the family apologising for the incident, update its discrimination policy relating to assistance animals and train staff accordingly, take step to obtain approval to display signage welcoming assistance animals, offer the family a free meal at the restaurant and pay the family $5,000.

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Employment - other opportunity provided 

Year

The complainant applied for a role with the respondent government agency but was unsuccessful because he has diabetes.

The government agency claimed the complainant’s disability prevented him from safely performing the inherent requirements of the role but indicated a willingness to participate in conciliation to try to resolve the complaint.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the complainant could proceed with the recruitment process and provide additional information about his disability.

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

Compensation

Amount $9,000
Year

The complainant advised she had depression for a short period in the past and that this does not impact on her ability to work. She applied for an increase to income protection insurance which was granted with an exception for mental health issues. She said she applied for a further two increases to her income protection insurance and claims the respondent insurer granted the first request with an exception for mental health issues and declined the second request.

The insurer denied unlawful discrimination but indicated a willingness to participate in conciliation to try to resolve the complaint.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the insurer pay the complainant $9,000.
 

Act Disability Discrimination Act
Grounds Disability
Areas Employment
Outcome details

Compensation;

Statement of service 

Amount $38,000
Year

The complainant is legally blind and was employed as a senior staff member with the respondent recruitment agency. He alleged other members of senior staff and the business owner discriminated against him because of his disability, including by ridiculing him for not using two computer screens, making derogatory comments about his disability and threatening to demote him when he sought to access personal leave.

The respondents denied discriminating against the complainant but agreed to participate in conciliation to try to resolve the complaint.

The complaint was resolved with an agreement that the employment relationship come to an end, the respondents pay the complainant $38,000 and provide him with a statement of service.