Skip to main content

Chevron told to reinstate employee who made racist slur

A Chevron Australia employee who was terminated for using a racist slur has been found to have been unfairly dismissed, the Fair Work Commission has ruled.

The FWC found dismissal was too severe for the offence and the workers' actions were "careless rather than involving reckless indifference".

However, the FWC did not award compensation for lost remuneration, finding the employee had caused offence to employees and had a responsibility to Chevron to comply with its policies.

HRD contacted Chevron for comment and a spokesperson said the company respects the FWC’s decision as an independent arbiter.

“Chevron Australia is fully committed to providing a diverse and inclusive work environment which is free from unlawful discrimination and where individual differences are respected,” said the statement.

“This commitment is reflected in policies, training and associated programs.”

The employee was on a bus to Chevron’s Gorgon project on Western Australia’s Barrow Island when he told colleagues a story about a friend and his girlfriend, “who was a young gin”.

The worker spoke about how his friend "rooted a gin down the beach" and had to leave her behind because he was "getting his arse chewed by sand-flies".

Another worker responded he "used to see gins hitchhiking from place to place and men would pick them up and f--- the bums off them and dump them in the middle of nowhere to make their own way back into town".

The comments were overheard by two indigenous workers and one complained that his "blood was boiling" and his "adrenalin was pumping". He also said he was “hurt, angry and so disgusted, as these disgusting comments are directed towards all the women” in his family.

Chevron dismissed the worker for "inappropriate workplace behaviour" after finding his use of the term "gin" was "absolutely intolerable" and contrary to its anti-discrimination policy.

However, the employee argued he had not realised "gin" was a derogatory term for indigenous women until he had googled it after the incident.

The employee also argued that he only thought it was derogatory if it was told directly to an indigenous woman.

He said he had apologised immediately to his indigenous colleagues and said he had a past history of advocating for and mentoring indigenous people.

The worker had been previously employed by BHP Billiton as an indigenous employment adviser and later by Fortescue Metals Group as an indigenous development adviser between 2010 and 2013.

He also gave evidence that he had been told by Chevron employees that a couple of weeks after he had been dismissed, another employee had used the word “nigger” in a meeting at the workplace with managers and he had only been given a written warning for this.

The commissioner Bruce Williams said the second indigenous man who overheard the bus comments had told Chevron that “growing up in WA in his culture ‘gin’ is not necessarily derogatory … Regard should have been had for the fact there was a range of opinion as to how rude or offensive using the word ‘gin’ was’’.


Originally published at - http://www.hcamag.com/hr-news/chevron-told-to-reinstate-employee-who-made-racist-slur-236889.aspx

AWPTI - workplace investigation Sydney and through-out NSW, QLD and Victoria. Workplace training national wide


Misconduct investigations, bullying investigations, harassment investigations & sexual harassment investigations, complaint investigations, grievance investigations, discrimination investigations

www.awpti.com.au
http://awpti.com.au/investigations/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Unfair dismissal – harsh to dismiss, however reinstatement not appropriate

In the recent decision of  Paul Johnson v BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd  [2017] FWC 4097, Commissioner Hampton found that, although the employee had engaged in misconduct constituting a valid reason for dismissal, the dismissal was nevertheless harsh due to a number of mitigating factors. However, the Commissioner did not consider reinstatement appropriate because the employer had a rational basis for its loss of trust and confidence in the employee given the importance of the need for compliance with safety policy and the maintenance of appropriate discipline in connection with workplace health and safety matters. The employee was instead awarded compensation. The facts The employee was employed by BHPB from 24 May 2001 until his dismissal on 31 March 2017. At the time of his dismissal, the employee was a process specialist, responsible for a team of technicians looking after a flash furnace and other equipment in areas of a smelting facility at an und...

Workplace Investigation biased process

The presence of bias be it actual or perceived during an investigation can derail the investigation and undermine any findings and recommendations. Complaint of bias are often raised relating to two areas, the investigation process itself or the investigation interviews. This article will examine the process, part two will examine bias during interviews. Workplace investigations are defined as  "an unbiased gathering of evidence"  and to ensure that that a complaint of bias is not raised or substantiated it is important to follow these rules; Approach the investigation with an open mind. Do no make any judgements on the parties Do not make any judgements on the truthfulness of any of the parties versions of events until all the evidence has been gathered. Gather all the evidence, not just the evidence that supports the complaint Do not form a theory and then seek evidence to support your theory only Do not make early determinations If you feel that you ...

Violence Valid Ground for Dismissal

Violence Valid Ground for Dismissal The Fair Work Commission (in the case of  Sekirski v Scope (Vic) Ltd [2017] FWC 1200 ) has found that an employee who assaulted a co-worker by striking her in the face was validly dismissed.  Stif Sekirski commenced employment as a Disability Support Worker with Scope (Vic) Ltd in November 2014.  Mr Sekirski’s employment was terminated on 2 September 2016 on grounds of serious misconduct. It was alleged that Mr Sekirski punched a co-worker in the face, then called her a bit** and threw a chair in her direction.  The FWC was satisfied that this conduct had occurred, and held that this conduct provided Scope with a valid reason to terminate Mr Sekirski’s employment. It is important that when confronted with matters involving violence in the workplace employers ensure that they conduct a timely and thorough investigation.   We recommend that even if summary dismissal is a likely outcome you should s...