I couldn't agree more - discrimination and bullying in the workplace is definately not handled in the correct way. In the end, it is usually the 'victim' of the discrimination or bullying that loses their job. What message does this give to the perpetrator and the other employees? The perpetrator gets to keep their job and continue bullying the other employees. The remaining employees are then afraid to report further cases of discrimination or bullying, or they too will lose their jobs.

This has to change.

The perpetrators should be fired, to give the clear message that this behaviour will not be allowed in the workplace. Until we do this, nothing will change and discrimination will be allowed to continue.

A great source of information for empoloyees in a bad situation can be obtained through
http://www.badapplebullies.com/

Welcome to Workchoices the Federal legislation that overrides State legislation. The only way to stop workplace bullying and intididation is to vote Labor in the coming Federal election. Continual bullying and intimidation cost me my job of 21 years, I could take no more and had a second nervous breakdown from which I have never recovered.

The "investigations" page of the Bad Apple Bullies website http://www.badapplebullies.com/investigations.htm describes the way in which the Queensland public service investigation processes can be abused to "find no evidence" of workplace bullying, harassment, mobbing, discrimination and victimisation or "payback".
There is a culture of fear in Queensland. Academics and teachers can be punished for engaging in professional discussion.

NSW – *not SA* – was the first state to have laws against discrimination with our 1977 Anti-Discrimination Act. The NSW ADA is the second piece of anti-discrimination legislation in Australia, the first being the federal Racial Discrimination Act of 1975.

It took 7 more years for the federal government to finally legislate against gender discrimination with the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984 and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act of 1986.

At the state level, NSW welcomed their ADA in 1977, followed 7 years later by the WA and SA with their Equal Opportunity Acts in 1984. QLD and ACT followed suit in 1991. Tasmania was the last state with the Tasmania Anti-Discrimination Act of 1998, 21 years after NSW.

1977 – 2007: 30 Years of Anti-Discrimination Law in NSW
What would you do without it?

Shonga,
I was very disturbed by your story of workplace bullying -

... Continual bullying and intimidation cost me my job of 21 years, I could take no more and had a second nervous breakdown from which I have never recovered.
Posted by SHONGA, Wednesday, 13 June 2007 11:00:37 AM ...

- but then I realised that you have made four posts in response to different articles today.
Is your workplace bullying story really true?
Or is blanket blogging just a pre-election strategy adopted by some members of the Labor Party?
The Labor Party and the unions need to take responsibility themselves for dealing with the workplace bullying in the public service.
And by "dealing with the problem" I do not mean just the energetic production of red herrings to distract attention from the real issue - the systemic workplace abuse of "subordinate" Australian public servants by slightly more senior public servants.
Yes, this is a Federal issue, but it is very much a state issue as well.
There is not a lot of point in being a member of a union if that union has a policy of allowing members to be bullied.

Dear Penny,

SA was first! not with an ADB but with the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Racial Discrimination Act 1976. Both were repealed by the SA EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT 1984 - but regardless of who was first, I don't think this was actually the point of the article.
The point, as I read it is that there seems to be little consequence for people who harass, bully and discriminate against workmates. If it were me, I wouldn't actually care about which state got it right first, I would be caring about the fact that no-one makes the bully say sorry or stops them, or makes them acknowledge that what they are doing is wrong. And that is pretty sad in 2007.

I made a formal complaint to the Anti-Discrimination board in relation to systematic victimisation, bullying, vilification and discrimination aimed at three of my children spanning over 6 years by staff of the Department of Education that included the manipulation of applications, test scores and documents to discredit my children and to keep them out of selective schools. I had the documentary evidence to support every one of my allegations.

I was told that they would not accept the complaints or investigate the allegations because "It wasn't against the law to discriminate against gifted children".

Apparently discrimination is only against the law if it is because of race, sex, marital status, age etc. The Anti-Discrimination board said I had to prove that what happened was because of their race, sex, age etc., before they would even look at the complaint. It seems that they expect the complainant to produce a confession or documents that prove that what is being done is being done because of race etc?? The fact that what was being done to my children was "obviously wrong" and breached Policies and codes of conduct didn't seem to count.

If bullying and discrimination is fueled by prejudice, malice and/or spite or by the tall poppy syndrome then it is allowed.

The failure of the Anti-Discrimination board to investigate the complaint and the failure of the Department or any of the Investigatory bodies to investigate the complaint has ensured that for the last 7 years my children' have continued to be targeted.

At the end of the day bullying isn't against the law. It's no wonder bullies rule - they are protected.

Jolanda – Education – Keeping them Honest
http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/
Our children deserve better.

Good item. That's two good ones in one day. A record for OLP in my opinion. Many items and essentially rubbish, particularly the religion based ones.

I digress. Sorry.

Workplace bullying has been around since Adam and Eve had a workplace dispute about apples. I too suspect Shonga's motives and facts regarding his "problem".

All of us have seen such bullying and most of us do nothing as we are just relieved it's not us. Until it's our turn that is.

I never faced it as such but saw so much of it that I eventually made a stand on behalf of the staff I managed. 30 of them. Guess what? I finished work within 6 months and have not worked since. My problem I guess you'd say but the source was wokplace bullying.

I've seen it up close and it is not only accepted in most workplaces, it's a strategy to cover the failings of many as managers. They can't do the job properly so turn to Neanderthal tactics. Threats and bullying.

Have you ever seen a senior man walk up to a desk where a young lady sits and hear him say "You don't work here any more". And then just walk away and refuse to include that lady in any work related activity. No work given, others made to ignore her or suffer the same. She left of course, shattered. But it took some time and it's toll. Put yourself in her place. Think about it. How would you deal with it if that were your daughter, sister, or partner? What would you do? Nothing is my guess.

Bullying won't go away if we all let it continue. Get off your backsides and oppose it. I know I failed but that's because it's rare to oppose what is everywhere. Cowards pretending to be managers. Over to you.

jolanda

i trust there isn't a next time (of bullying against your children). if there is, clearly they have an age discrimination claim.

direct (unequal treatment) discrimination: if they were not minors, they would have been treated differently - that is, they suffered less favourable treatment by the school authorities, by their complaints not having been taken seriously. if they were adults making complaints about having been illtreated in the school/workplace, the authority would at least have had to have made motions of taking complaints seriously. (see further comment below.)

indirect ('equal' treatment) discrimination: to counter the argument that minors and adults would have been treated 'the same' in making complaints to the school authorities about their having been bullied/suffering harassment, etc, you say: if adults are ignored in such a situation, they have recourse to the courts, they can speak out to media, etc etc; if children are ignored, they have no recourse - cannot launch a case in courts, cannot go to solicitors, etc for advice and possible redress, will not be listened to by media and less likely to find their way to the media, etc.

under the tasmanian *anti-discrimination act* 1998 from october 1999-october 2004 claims of bullying vis-a-vis children at school were accepted for investigation and qualified as discrimination and/or prohibited conduct under the act.

further comment re 'direct' (unequal treatment) discrimination - for all those who wish to say that adults' complaints would not be taken seriously, 'indirect' discrimination applies for children on the basis of age as explained above.

also there may be a claim in contract - nowadays, most people are paying for their children's education, whether in the private sector or public sector (this latter is of course a whole other topic). there may also be a tortious claim of 'trespass against the person'.

SHONGA

You r of course joking when you write
'The only way to stop workplace bullying and intididation is to vote Labor in the coming Federal election.' The Unions are the biggest bullies in our country. Men like Kevin Reynolds make a living out of bullying. Many tradespersons have been sent to the wall by the militant unions who bully and refuse to play their games. In case you did not know many of the union bullies end up with safe labour seats.

Jocelynne, I made a discrimination complaint on various grounds. My public service employer had several solicitors and barristers on staff, including at least one who had worked for the HREOC (I understand). But my employer asked an Aboriginal employee to "review" my complaint. The Aboriginal employee was not qualified in my profession and had no qualifications in law or psychology. In his "review" he simply copied out statements from a huge mass of falsified documents that had been placed secretly on my departmental file. Halfway through the investigation I discovered some of these hidden documents under FOI, but my responses were disregarded. I feel that the Aboriginal employee was being manipulated as a puppet to abuse me. And that I was being discriminated against in that I was educated in a Western thinking style. My experience of Aboriginal discussions suggests to me that Aboriginal people have a different style of thinking. And I am English - I was brought up to discuss issues. I was not brought up to expect or to tolerate public service corruption. My argument would be that the Aboriginal person who was appointed to "review" my complaint came from a different thinking style and from a culture which has experienced generations of public service corruption. Does this seem like discrimination to you?

jocelynne. Thank you for your response. I sincerely hope it doesn't happen again.

It just so happens that this year my youngest son is in Year 4 and he has applied for Opportunity Class for Years 5 and 6. We asked the school to send the application directly to the Director General and asked that nobody previously involved in my families matter be permitted to process his application. We asked this before with our younger daughter in 2004 and 2006. However internal emails produced under FOI show that these persons handled the application and there are even emails/notes stating that these persons names have been removed from the sign off so as to present as though they were not involved.

My son has missed a lot of school; he has developed a bit of an attitude towards learning. He has been home-schooled, has been put on Distance Education on medical and psychological grounds. He has suffered from anxiety and physical ailments due to his fear of school. He has been impacted by what he has seen his siblings go through and the fact that he feels victimized. He insists that he is different and he is not liked because of it. He wants to get into opportunity class, he hopes that there he will find other boys of like mind and maybe he would even have friends. He finds the children of his age childish, aggressive and unpredictable. He finds school long and boring. Luckily this year he has a teacher that likes him so he is coping okay, but he fears next year.

I don’t know what to do anymore. I have been unfairly and internally deemed vexatious by those we allege are responsible. I have tried every avenue to have the matter addressed. It seems like the system is set up to protect those that fail in their duty of care.

I will keep your advice in mind when once again my family are dealt with by the system. Thanks again.

Education - Keeping them honest
http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/
Our children deserve better.

Dealing With The Mob. My daughter came home from school today telling me that in Legal Studies (she is in Year 11) they are learning about how you can ask a Government Department for a review of a decision and how they are required to review it. She tells me that from what she learned they are supposed to have 'reviews of decisions' reviewed by a panel of impartial people.

A review isn’t supposed to be carried out by one, especially one chosen by, and presented information by, those alleged to be responsible.

The process used is designed to cover up and, in the process, discredit and frustrate complainants.

There is no doubt that there is an expectation that those who are targeted, bullied and victimised cop it sweet. There is even a belief that somehow they must have deserved it. There is also no doubt that this attitude is part of a culture

SA Expert, have you seen the latest news on South Africa? They have a time bomb waiting in the shadows and the government is aware of it.
See the comments made in this forum on the topic of 2010 in South Africa.

clarification

the 'sa' is for south australia in the earlier post clarifying that sa - as in south australia (not south africa) - was first (of the states) with discrimination legislation. federally the racial discrimination act was passed in 1975.

clarification

the 'sa' is for south australia in the earlier post clarifying that sa - as in south australia (not south africa) - was first (of the australian states/territories) with discrimination legislation. federally the racial discrimination act was passed in 1975.

If I wanted to open a chain of restaurants with a "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" theme, I would be sued and outlawed.

As I would only employ white women (as Snow White) and midgets (as dwarves), this would involve multiple forms of discrimination: race, gender, height.

With 7 dwarves for every 1 Snow White, 87.5% of my staff would be midgets.

My restaurants would therefore be specifically designed for people of small stature.

How many other workplaces can you think of that specifically cater to small people's needs?

The design would have the additional benefit of being suitable for the other "little people" of our world: children.

Families would be most of the customers, and children would enjoy both the theme and the child-friendly design.

Why can't I do this? Who am I hurting?
I'm employing minorities and bringing joy to children.
How is this wrong?

Why is there no differentiation between negative "discrimination" and neutral or positive "discriminination"?
Discrimination doesn't automatically imply harm.

And doesn't the employer have a right to say who they employ?
It's their business, their creation, their money at stake.

A perfectly wonderful idea such as the above would be illegal.
It's ridiculous.