Analyzing Discrimination: Employment Law in Victoria, Australia

This report analyzes workplace discrimination issues faced by young workers in Victoria, Australia, focusing on the legal rights of Leanne and Kenny under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic), Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), and other federal legislation. It identifies instances of direct and indirect discrimination, harassment, and bullying, referencing relevant Australian Human Rights Commission Acts and other anti-discrimination laws. The report also examines a case involving the termination of a national agreement with Woolworths and potential underpayment of workers, highlighting the role of the Retail and Fast Food Workers Union and the Fair Work Commission in addressing these issues. The document concludes by emphasizing the importance of fair work practices and the legal protections available to employees facing discrimination and unfair treatment in the workplace. Desklib provides access to similar assignments and study resources for students.

Employment law

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Question 1........................................................................................................................................3
Issues in the present study...........................................................................................................3
Legal principle related with the harassment, discrimination and bullying..................................5
Direct Discrimination or Indirect Discrimination........................................................................7
Question 2........................................................................................................................................8
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................10
References......................................................................................................................................11

INTRODUCTION
Discrimination refers to the unfair treatment with the varied group of people which may be based
on factors such as nationality, sex, race, colour, age etc. (Smith, 2017). Discrimination is a
common practice in many organization conducted either through the policies or the practices or
the by the employer himself (Gumbus, and Grodzinsky, 2016). The government of Australia has
taken the various steps to prevent discrimination towards the employee by introducing statutory
norms. With this regards, the government built the various Acts which describe the rules and
regulations which are mandatory to be followed by corporate entities operating in Australia. The
present study revolves around the case scenarios of discrimination at the workplace by the
employer. Further in this study identification of discrimination and also analysis of the legal right
available to the worker is done to protect their interest from the prejudiced behaviour by the
employer. Apart from this, the study also covers the wage structure of the organization. In this
study the comparison between the national agreement and general retail industry award also
stated. Further, the proposed amendment in the SDA agreement also described in this study.
QUESTION 1
Issues in the present study
The given study is related with the young people who were working at a workplace and suffered
from the discrimination, harassment and Bullying. In the given study the young workers, Leanne
and Kenny were suffered from terrible employment terms. At the working place, the more
priority was given to the male employees. At the time of the interview by the employer of the
company, asked offensive questions from the candidates. Along with this aspect, there are so
many other things prevailing in the organization which leads to discrimination, harassment and
Bullying with the employees of the company.
Discrimination takes place on the basis of the background or certain features; the person is
treated as less positive as compared with another person or the group of person (Henry, and
Powell, 2015). Further the discrimination occurs at several point of time between the employer
and employee relationship, which consist of at the time of appointing the staff, norms and
condition related with the appointment or the benefit which are provided by the employer as a

part of the employment, at the time when the person is designated for the training, transfer or
enhancement and much other time (Fredman, 2017). In the present study, the employer asked
irrelevant questions lead to victimization which indicates unethical practices employed by the
employer.
Harassment takes place on the basis of the sex, incapacity, culture and age of the person; the
person is treated as less positively as compare with another person or the group of person. The
harassment also consists of expressing abusive comments about the specific culture, transferring
the emails or text messages which are not obvious, presenting ethnically violent, insulting about
the incapacity of the person or inquiring about the private life of any person and so on. In the
present study, since the worker is the female, the manager of the company does not prefer the
female recruiter and is downgrading young female employee.
According to the Fair Work Amendment Act 2013, bullying means allowing or conducting
frequently awkward activities by the individual at the workplace towards another person by
which the issues related with the health and safety arises (French, Boyle, and Muurlink, 2014).
Bullying behaviour consists of physical or verbal misrepresentation, blaring aggressive language,
rejecting employees, emotional provocation, unnecessary pressure, allocation the work which is
not related with the employment (Pekarek & et al. 2017). Appointing the employees for
unreasonable or the difficult task, intentionally change the work pattern which is not convenient
to the employee, not share information with the particular employee so that the performance of
the worker gets adversely impacted (Bray, and Power, 2017). In the given video it has been seen
that there is workplace discrimination, due to the different approach of training of male and
female employees. Male employees were given better training, but the female employees were
totally neglected. In this video, the female employees seek to learn more advanced things, and
she was quick and talented, but the manager and boss were not allowing her for the same, in
contrary, they instructed her to only concentrate more on basics. This activities by the employer
at the workplace affects the working performance of the female worker as if the female worker
also have the equal chance of obtaining the training then this leads to the improvement in the
performance of the female workers also
On the basis of the above analysis, it has been seen that the worker of the organization suffered
from the discrimination, harassment and the Bullying because the employer of the organization

did not treat all the workers equally. However, the employer of the organization is accountable
for the environment in the workplace, and the employer should consider all the employees
equally. The government of Australia built the various rules regarding the safety and security at
the workplace, and it is mandatory for all the organizations to follow all the norms applicable to
them. The government of Australia established various rules, regulations in the federal and the
state anti-discrimination law as well as in The Fair Work Act 2009, which elaborate about the
certain type of working environment which are considered as in contradiction of the law.
Legal principle related to the harassment, discrimination and bullying
The government of Australia take various measures to remove the discrimination from the
country. With this regards government has implemented various Acts such as the Age
Discrimination Act 2004, Disability Discrimination Act 1992, Racial Discrimination Act 1975,
Sex Discrimination Act 1984, and the Australian Human Right Commission Act 1986
(Australian Human Rights Commission, 2018).
The Australian Human Right Commission Act 1986, state the various rules, regulation and
norms which ensures the safeguarding of the employees by the discrimination at the workplace.
Under this Act, the employee can make to complaints about the discrimination, harassment to the
Australian Human Right Commission which is covered under the federal anti-discrimination law
(Australian Human Rights Commission, 2016). After the filing of the application, the
commission itself look into the matter and analyse and address the complaint filed by the
applicant. Moreover, for filing the complaint under the Human Right Commission Act, the
applicant does not require to pay any fee. Any employee, consumer or any other person who
suffered from discrimination or the harassment can make the complaint (Galligan, and Morton,
2017). After getting the application from the applicant, the commission makes the inquiry from
the employer or the organization or the person against the application is received and give the
reasonable opportunity to answer and solve the complaint. Therefore in the present study, the
worker Leanne and Kenny has right under the Human Right Commission Act to file the
application against the employer at no cost. After receiving the application from the Leanne and
Kenny, the commission investigates the matter defined in the application and give the equal
opportunity to the employer to respond against the application (Australian Human Rights
Commission, 2018). The commission always tries to help and resolve the complaint made by the

applicant and in the opinion on the commission that discrimination has happened then
commission after the inclusion of the recommendation report to the federal Attorney-general.
Further, it is contrary to the Act of the Discrimination law to behave unfavourably to an
employee as compared with the other person. Further Sex Discrimination Act 1984 also defined
the prevention of the sexual harassment at the workplace by employer or colleagues, or other
persons at the workplace. The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 banned the inappropriate
behaviour which leads to the racial discrimination and The Disability Discrimination Act 1992
also states the norms to prohibiting the discrimination on the basis of the incapacity of the
person. Further in the Civil Right Act 1964, Title VII safeguards the employees or any other
person against the discrimination which is based on the colour, gender, nationality or the culture.
This Act also prohibits the employer for any adverse action against the employee or any other
person who affirm any action. Further, this Act says that it is illegal to discriminate any
employee or the person on the basis of the certain features.
Apart from the above the government of Australia also passed the Fair Work Act 2009 with the
objective to set up the rules and regulations at the workplace. It describes all the principle and the
procedures for the employment which should be known to all the organization and the business
firms. This act states the norms and the situation of the employment, rights and accountability of
the employee, employer and the industries in relation to the employment, passivity and the
implementation of the act and by establishing the fair work commission and fair work regulator
supervise the activities. Moreover, it is mandatory for all the organization to follow all the rules
and guidelines which are stated in the Fair Work Act 2009.
For enhancing and enabling the fairness at the workplace, in Australia the Equal Opportunity Act
2010 came into enforcing. The basic objective of this law is to identify the discrimination,
offences and the harassment and take steps to exclude it.
On the basis of the above analysis it has been seen there are so many measures implemented by
the government for the protection and the safeguarding of the employees at the workplace. The
workers Leanne and Kenny by adopting the above laws can protect themselves by making the
complaints against the organization or the employer of the organization.

Direct Discrimination or Indirect Discrimination
Direct Discrimination occurs at the time when the employer treats less favourably only to the
particular employee due to the certain features. Indirect discrimination arises due to the policies,
practices, rules, regulations by which the all employee of the company get adversely affected. In
other words, it can be said that the due to the direct discrimination particular employee of the
company get affected however due to the indirect discrimination all the employees get adversely
affected (Zhang, Wu, and Wu, 2016).
In the present study at the time of the interview, the employer asked an irrelevant question with
victimization; it is regarded as the Direct discrimination against the employee as in this the
particular employee gets affected due to the misbehaviour of the employee. Further, the gender
discrimination with the female employee is considered as the indirect discrimination because the
all the female employee suffered in the organization due to the gender discrimination practice in
the organization. Moreover, in the company, the training also provided to the male employee
only, it also leads to the indirect discrimination in the organization.
From the above analysis, it has been observed that the organization gave priority to the male
since the training provided only to the male employees of the organization and the female are
supposed to focus only on the basic aspects. The company did not follow the fair practice.
Therefore, the employer of the company was accountable for all the prejudicial impact for the
female employees.
QUESTION 2
Summary of article
The present study is about the termination of the national agreement of 2012 with the workers of
the Woolworth and recovery of the $ 1 billion of the suspected underpayment. For this, the
secretary of the retail and fast food workers union undertake the matter and represent the
supervisor of the Woolworth in their fair work commission proposal for removing the national
agreement of 2012. Since the supervisor of the Woolworth due to the national agreement 2012
dawn to the $ 4000 in comparison that he can earn according to the norms of the fair work
commission Act which includes the General Retail Industry Awards 2010. Further the secretary

stated that since the deal was implemented the majority of the worker faced the adverse
condition with respect to the payment. Along with this, in this agreement on the weeknight
evenings, during the day on Saturday and Sunday, no rates have been provided therefore the
majority suffered even more. In addition to this, Casual loading also reduced from 25% to 20%.
Further the secretary is very dedicated for the discussion with the Woolworth so that accepted
agreement can be made with the Woolworth. For this secretary advising that if the matter was
discussed before the member of the retail and fast food workers union are prepared then it may
lead to breaking the good negotiation requirement. Further the secretary states that for the
approval by the members of the RAFFWU, it is essential to remove restriction from the base rate
and give back what has been exposed. The secretary has suspected that even the members give a
vote for the new proposal, but also FWC can approve in its current situation. Further the
secretary said that it would go more difficult and require significant time for approving it.
Apart from the above, the secretary said that the old agreement approved by the FWC since the
FWC trusted on the deceptive material from Woolworth. The majority of the worker worked at
evening and weekends, even though the agreement did not consider those working hours.
Key terms and their meaning
Further, the SDA Coles Agreement act defines the new enterprise agreement which ensures
about the safeguarding for the current employee to take home pay, enhance the penalty rate
which is better than the award rate, better norms as comparing the existing agreement and
increment for all the employees (SDA COLES AGREEMENT SUMMARY DOCUMENT,
2017). This agreement is in compliance with the General Retail Industry Award. For the
protection of the existing staff and growth of the wages in the coming year, the SDA work in a
very efficient manner so that the pay structure can be improved.
The AWU refers as the Australian Workers’ Union, which is the organization of the workers of
Australia. The main objective of the establishment of the AWU is to obtain the general aim of
the worker such as availing the proper remuneration, benefit, issues related to health and safety
and many more. The Australian Workers union is the one of the largest trade union in the world
which consists of around one lacks members. Further, the union has a state, geographical or the
industry based branches.

AMIEU refers to the Australian Meat Industry Employee Union, which is established with the
main objective for the prevention of any type of harsh behaviour towards the animal at the time
of the production of the meat or the transportation of the animals from one place to another
place. This union make the provisions related to the treatment of the animal, building the
structure for the easy movement of the animal and take various measures for safeguarding the
animals. Further this union emphasis on the organization to make plans and procedures in such a
way which will not make any adverse impact on the animals.
Impact of terms on the article
By considering the terms, in the May 2016, member of the FWC originate that the better off
overall award (BOOT), which is based on the modern award was not for the benefit and the
interest of the employee. Therefore the agreement improves the situation as compared with the
award, due to this the agreement of 2011 adopted by the workers.
The representative of the SDA, states that SDA is carrying an amendment which assists for the
home pay, better rates for a penalty, obtain secure terms and condition and enable to all the
worker to get their payment as and when arises. All the pending issues will be considered in the
meeting of the SDA and will be according to the standard set out in the SDA, the AWU and
AMIEU. Moreover, the representative said that The Woolworth has a chance to vote on the
enterprise bargaining agreement.
On August 2018, the representative of the Woolworth said that the RAFFWU get agreed with the
new agreement for more than six months, and the new agreement leads to the better conditions
for the members. Further he also said that the new agreement already as per the standard and the
norms of the SDA, AWU and AMIEU, but still, the response from the RAFFWU is required.
The national agreement of 2012, states about the wage structure of the company. In the given
structure the base rate is set up for the non-casual staff for different categories and different
states. Further, in the agreement, the casual loading is defined as 20%, and penalty rates apply
only for a number of hours (ANALYSIS DOCUMENT – TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT,
2018). However, as per the award, the base rate additional casual loading of 25% applicable and
overtime rate or the certain hour, penalty rate and public holiday rate is also defined.

On the basis of the above analysis, it has been seen that the Woolworth is able to approve the
new agreement with the retail and fast food worker union for the six months only. However, the
new agreement is according to the principles contained in the SDA, AWU and AMIEU but also
the support of the retail and fast food worker union is needed.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above study, it has been concluded that it is the responsibility of the employer
to ensure the fair and transparent working environment at the workplace. The employer should
make the proper policies and practices which leads to the safety at the workplace. The
government of Australia approve various rules and regulation which assist the protection of the
employees at the workplace. Further, in this study, the direct discrimination and the indirect
discrimination observed in the workplace. Along with this, the government also gave the various
rights to the worker, by which they can make the application against the discrimination and can
protect themselves from the terrible working environment at the organization. Apart from the
above, it has been seen that Woolworth is succeeded in the implementation of the new agreement
for the six months with the agreement with the retail and fast food worker union. The new
agreement is better than as compared with the existing agreement, and also it is according to the
norms set out in the SDA, AWU and AMIEU.

REFERENCES
Analysis Document – Termination of Agreement, 2018. (Pdf). Available from
< https://cdn.workplaceexpress.com.au/files/2018/Cullinan%20180823%20Woolworths
%20Agreement%20%20Award%20Analysis.pdf>. [Accessed on 11 October 2018].
Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union, 2018. Welcome to the web site of the Australasian
Meat Industry Employees Union (Online).Available from < https://amieu.asn.au/>. [Accessed on
11 October 2018].
Australian Human Rights Commission, 2016. Willing to work: national inquiry into employment
discrimination against older Australians and Australians with disability (2016). Sage,
Australian Human Rights Commission, 2018. (Online). Available from
< https://www.humanrights.gov.au/>. [Accessed on 11 October 2018].
Australian Human Rights Commission, 2018. A quick guide to Australian discrimination laws
(pdf).Available from
< https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/GPGB_quick_guide_to_discrimination_law
s_0.pdf>. [Accessed on 11 October 2018].
Bray, A. and Power, C., 2017. The fair work commission's' new approach'. Precedent (Sydney,
NSW), (141), p.27.
Fredman, S., 2017. Disability equality: a challenge to the existing anti-discrimination paradigm?.
In Disability and Equality Law (pp. 123-142). Routledge.
French, B., Boyle, M.V. and Muurlink, O., 2014. Workplace Bullying in Australia: The Fair
Work Act and its impact. New Zealand Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(2), pp.69-
81.
Galligan, B. and Morton, F.T., 2017. Australian exceptionalism: Rights protection without a bill
of rights. In Protecting Rights Without a Bill of Rights (pp. 27-50). Routledge.
Gumbus, A. and Grodzinsky, F., 2016. Era of big data: Danger of descrimination. ACM SIGCAS
Computers and Society, 45(3), pp.118-125.

Henry, N. and Powell, A., 2015. Embodied harms: Gender, shame, and technology-facilitated
sexual violence. Violence against women, 21(6), pp.758-779.
Pekarek, A., Landau, I., Gahan, P., Forsyth, A. and Howe, J., 2017. Old game, new rules? The
dynamics of enterprise bargaining under the Fair Work Act. Journal of Industrial
Relations, 59(1), pp.44-64.
SDA COLES AGREEMENT SUMMARY DOCUMENT, 2017. (Pdf). Available from
< https://www.sda.com.au/media/Coles-Summary-Doc-FULL.pdf>. [Accessed on 11 October
2018].
Smith, K., 2017. Discrimination. The Wiley
‐Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory, pp.1-2.
The Australian Human Rights Commission’s Complaint Process: for complaints about
discrimination in employment (ILO) (Online).Available from
< https://www.humanrights.gov.au/complaints/australian-human-rights-commission-s-complaint-
process-complaints-about-discrimination>. [Accessed on 11 October 2018].
Zhang, L., Wu, Y. and Wu, X., 2016. A causal framework for discovering and removing direct
and indirect discrimination. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.07509.