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: communications@humanrights.gov.au.

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: publications@humanrights.gov.au

Australian Human Rights Commissionwww.humanrights.gov.au