Browsing: Discrimination | Page 10

An employer and its workplace health service provider have been ordered to pay a worker $100,000 each, after their use of her picture in a s-xually suggestive workplace health and safety poster led her to suffer a "serious and prolonged psychological injury".

Employers will have an explicit positive duty to eliminate workplace s-xual harassment and discrimination, under laws flagged in response to the latest major review of the issue. The review identified barriers to tackling harassment "through a WHS lens".

An industrial commissioner wrongly relied on a worker's pre-employment medical report to determine whether he suffered from an impairing skin rash, but he was not subjected to discrimination when he was dismissed for putting his hands down his shorts at work, a judge has ruled.

• Amendments fill workplace harassment and safety "gaps"; and
  
• WHS regulator targets psychological risks.

A manager's "overtly transactional" text message proposals and acts of withholding work to intimidate a worker into having s-x with him, meant going to work was "fraught with difficulty" for the worker and warranted police intervention, a commissioner has found.

• Workplace mask rule imposed under "post-lockdown" measures; and
  
• Appeals court rules on harassing WHS poster dispute.

A commission has rejected a worker's claim that his employer discriminated against him when it sacked him for scratching a rash-prone area under his shorts, finding there was no evidence, from an employment medical assessment or otherwise, that he had a skin condition at the time.

A tribunal bench has confirmed that Sydney Water and its workplace health service provider discriminated against a worker by displaying her photo on a safety campaign poster with a s-xual double entendre.

• Businesses warned after employer cops three OHS fines; and
  
• Director fined for blocking pregnant worker's RTW.

An injured worker's $30,000 anti-discrimination settlement, described as "General Damages" in the deed of release, did not prevent him from pursuing workers' compensation or work injury damages, an appeals court has ruled in quashing two earlier decisions in favour of a major employer.