Complaint rejected and decision reviewed by the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal
The complainant alleged discrimination on the basis of age and industrial activity in the area of employment. The complainant’s employment was terminated and they alleged they were bullied and mistreated by staff.
When the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner sought more information about the complaint, the complainant said they didn’t believe they had been discriminated against on the basis of age.
The complainant thought the discrimination related to industrial activity because they had made an application to the Fair Work Commission against their previous employer.
The Commissioner rejected the complaint because there was insufficient information to show that the complainant was discriminated against on the basis of age and industrial activity. There was no information to show that the employer was aware that the complainant had made an application to the Fair Work Commission against their previous employer.
The complainant applied to the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal to review the Commissioner’s decision to reject the complaint.
The Tribunal reviewed the decision and decided the Commissioner made a correct decision to reject the complaint. The Tribunal looked at the information the complainant had provided to the Commissioner and more information provided by the complainant to the Tribunal. The further information included that a supervisor said to the complainant ‘I am older than you’.
The Tribunal noted that it is not enough that someone has a belief they have been discriminated against because of their age or industrial activity, there must be facts that support it. In this case, there was no evidence to support it. There was only one instance of a supervisor saying he was older than the complainant. The Tribunal also held there was no evidence to support that the complainant’s employer knew about the employee’s previous application to the Fair Work Commission or discriminated against them because of it.
Complaint rejected as complainant could not show the reason he did not get a job was his race
A complaint was received from a person who was born overseas. The complainant had applied for a job, but was not successful. The complainant alleged that this was race discrimination.
The Anti-Discrimination Commissioner rejected the complaint. In rejecting the complaint, the Commissioner said that there needs to be some evidence to show that the person’s race was the reason for the alleged discrimination (in this case not getting the job). The Commissioner noted that there was no evidence (other than the complainant’s belief) to show the complainant’s race was the reason they did not get the job, and rejected the complaint on this basis.