This is an extraordinary decision by the Industrial Relations Commission. Telstra has had its right to sack an employee upheld, where the basis of the sacking was that she had sex with another employee (or employees, it seems) outside of work hours and then refused to tell her benevolent employer corporation the details.
In the first instance the IRC ruled that she had been unjustly sacked, and (in essence) that what Telstra’s employees did in a hotel room in their own time was none of the company’s business.
However, on appeal the IRC has overturned that decision and ruled that the sacking was legitimate. To summarise the reasoning, “it’s not because you had sex - it’s because you lied about it when Telstra asked you.” Apparently refusing to answer questions about the incident when Telstra was investigating a harassment claim was sufficient to break the bond of ‘trust’ between the employer and employee and justify dismissal. A less artful way of looking at it is that the IRC held that if your employer receives a harassment complaint then you are obliged to tell your employer who you f**k, and the circumstances in which you f**k them.
Although the phrase is often misused and is generally cringe-worthy, it’s hard to disagree with the employee’s lawyer when he calls the decision “un-Australian”. It smacks of the philosophy of everyone’s favourite corporate state, the United States - your employer has an absolute right to control every aspect of your life, and if you don’t like it your only recourse it to get another job. After all, it’s an employee’s market, as we’re so often told.
A right of appeal lies to the Federal Court - one can only hope that it is pursued, and our right to do whatever the hell we want, to whichever consenting adults we want, in privacy and outside of work hours, and without having to disclose the details to our employer is reinstated before we go too far down this path.
Another question: if we had a bill of rights, would this amount to impermissible discrimination on the basis of sexual preferences?
The Full Bench are so often not the Full Quid. Let’s hope a Bill of Rights fixes up this sort of crap.
If she wasn’t able to answer the employer (who apparently found out due to excessive talk from her co-workers who were in the hotel) because she was embarrased, then I humbly think she would be too embarrassed to go back among her co-emloyees after her pictures get published in the papers.
I normally would be furious against the said employer, but her behavior in front of the other women, leading to problems/discomfort in the workplace, probably provides sufficient ground for the employer to release her and prevent further troubles at work. Really, if they think you’re a whore(and you are, kind of) find somewhere else where they don’t care.