Skip to main content

Tuggerah hair salon's male owner and senior male employee sexually harassed and victimised apprentice

A young male hairdressing trainee has been awarded $30,000 after a tribunal accepted he had been sexually harassed and victimised by senior males at a salon, including being told “hairdressers are like racehorses, they need a pat on the bum to go faster”.

Arthur Kordas spent less than three months as a trainee at Aztec Hair and Beauty at Tuggerah but experienced sexual harassment and victimisation that had “a significant impact” on him, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal found.

Mr Kordas was awarded $15,000 for sexual harassment by a senior salon employee and the salon manager between November 2014 and February, 2015, and $15,000 for victimisation after he complained about the harassment.

Mr Kordas was sacked after he broke down at work on February 11, 2015. It followed two incidents in which senior employee Dean Eaton grabbed him around the waist from behind, once in front of customers, with both occasions witnessed by salon manager Sayeed Rony.

Mr Kordas later told Mr Rony “This sexual harassment has to stop”, but days later Mr Rony said he had “spoken with the team and I’m going to have to let you go”.

Mr Rony or a representative failed to appear at several tribunal hearing dates after earlier denying the sexual harassment and victimisation allegations.

The tribunal heard that Mr Kordas felt uncomfortable during his first week at the salon when Mr Rony lightly stroked his palm after giving him money to buy items for the salon.

A month after he started work as a trainee Mr Eaton told customers that he and Mr Kordas were “like a gay couple. We argue like a gay couple. We’re close”.

Mr Kordas said this made him feel embarrassed and humiliated, but he said nothing because he wanted to keep his job.

On another occasion Mr Eaton slapped Mr Kordas on the bottom in front of another employee and said: “You should slap me on the bum. I like being slapped on the bum.”

On another occasion Mr Eaton agreed that he got on with Mr Kordas “because you’re my bitch”.

In a discussion after Mr Rony accused Mr Kordas of “not smiling anymore”, the trainee angrily responded that he was being underpaid and harassed by three staff members, including Mr Eaton.

Later that day Mr Rony told Mr Kordas: “I'm sorry about what happened before. Hairdressers are like racehorses. They're all equal, but they need a pat on the bum to go faster.”

The tribunal accepted evidence from a psychologist and doctor that Mr Kordas had “done all the right things” to try to remain employed but was left “humiliated, distressed and out of employment” as a result of the sexual harassment and victimisation.

The company Ruba and Jo Pty Ltd, trading as Aztec Hair and Beauty, was ordered to pay Mr Kordas $30,000 within 21 days of the decision on Thursday. The figure included $10,000 for sexual harassment by Mr Eaton, $5000 for sexual harassment by Mr Rony and $15,000 for victimisation.

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/

Originally published at - http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4686413/male-hairdresser-wins-30000-sexual-harassment-case/


Labels:
Location: Sydney NSW, Australia

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lorna Jane vindicated after two-year, $570,000 bullying case

Legal experts are urging businesses to train their staff in up-to-date social media policies this year, after activewear brand Lorna Jane won a two-year legal battle in November against a former employee who claimed the company was responsible for the psychiatric impacts of bullying at work. Former Brisbane store manager Amy Robinson filed a legal claim against Lorna Jane in 2015, seeking $570,000 in damages. The former manager claimed Lorna Jane was negligent and should be held responsible for her being bullied by a learning and development manager at the company, which led to psychiatric illness and a loss of employment and future employability. The company came out swinging against the claims early on,   posting a later-deleted Facebook post in 2015 defending itself against the claims  and saying it had been “very disappointed” by what had been reported in the media about the case. The claims included that Robinson was bullied and called a variety of names while...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop-bullying application rejected

An employee who claimed his new team leader micromanaged and bullied him has had his stop-bullying application rejected, after the Fair Work Commission found her behaviour "abrupt" but not repeated or unreasonable. The Bunnings Warehouse employee claimed that in May 2016 the new team leader asked him about his face – the left side of his face "droops" and he is unable to move his left arm – which he found "deeply disrespectful and hurtful". A few weeks later, the team leader on two occasions confronted him and questioned why he was in different sections of the store, he told the Commission, noting he believed he was being singled out and treated differently from colleagues. He contacted the store manager to discuss the issue but was told she was too busy to speak with him, and he subsequently took two days off because of work-related stress. The employee claimed that when he returned to work, the employer suspended him but didn't tell him wh...
Post a Comment
Read more