Worker claims bullying complaint not handled appropriately by school
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) recently dealt with a worker’s dismissal claim, alleging she was fired by her employer, who allegedly “discriminated against her” because she was a casual employee.
Meanwhile, the employer said she breached her employment contract when she showed an inappropriate video to its students.
The worker, Cecilia Liao, filed for a general protections dispute related to her termination from her employer Canberra Grammar School. According to the worker, she was dismissed on 12 May 2023, and she initiated her application on 2 August 2023.
The employer, on the other hand, disputed the worker's claim of being dismissed, saying she was employed on a casual basis. Alternatively, the employer said that 12 May marked the date when the worker was informed that she would no longer be offered casual employment opportunities.
According to records, several factors contributed to the delay in the worker's application. She said she wanted to file a bullying complaint but was advised by registry personnel that this was not feasible due to her no longer being employed.
Additionally, the worker said she had no knowledge of the 21-day period.
The worker said she sent around 40 emails to the employer about a range of matters, including the alleged workplace bullying and its refusal to provide further work to her. The employer said it tried to set a meeting with the worker, but she declined the invitation.
The employer pointed to the fact that the worker was a casual relief teacher who was engaged to provide services on an ad hoc basis from time to time.
It referenced the terms of her employment contract, which confirmed that her employment ended at the end of every engagement.
The employer emphasised that the worker breached the terms of her employment contract by showing the Chinese language students 57 seconds of a video of former Prime Minister Paul Keating talking about "the China threat."
The employer argued this was a good reason not to engage the worker for further relief teaching engagements. On the other hand, the worker contended she was discriminated against because she was a casual employee, and the terms of her employment contract were unfair.
The FWC noted that the worker’s dismissal application was delayed and had to look into any exceptional circumstance that would extend the period.
It said it understood that “the worker feels aggrieved and wronged, and that her complaint about workplace bullying was not handled appropriately.”
However, after consideration, it said it was “not satisfied” that there are exceptional circumstances “which would warrant granting an exception to the statutory time limit.”
“The circumstances of the case are not out of the ordinary course, unusual, special or uncommon. On this basis, the application is dismissed,” the FWC ruled.
