❓ Hon George Cash asks whether the Equal Opportunity Commissioner requested amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 to align with the Commonwealth's Sex Discrimination Act, and when the government intends to introduce such amendments. The Minister acknowledges the Commissioner's view that improvements could be made and states the government is open to working with the Commissioner.
AnsweredQoN 539Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Has the Equal Opportunity Commissioner requested that the definition of “harassment” in the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 be amended to bring it into line with the Commonwealth’s Sex Discrimination Act; and, if so, when does the Government intend to introduce the necessary amendment? (2) If not, why not? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
(2) If not, why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this.
It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this.
(2) If not, why not? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
I thank Hon George Cash for some notice of this question. The answer is lengthy. I seek leave to table the answer and have it incorporated in Hansard . Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
Leave granted. The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
The following material was incorporated - 1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
1. The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 were enacted in the same year, 1984. The Equal Opportunity Act, however, commenced operation approximately one year after the Sex Discrimination Act, in July 1985. Each Act contained a provision making sexual harassment in employment unlawful, in terms almost identical to section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act in its current form. In 1992, the provisions in both Acts concerning sexual harassment were amended, but for different reasons. Section 24 of the Equal Opportunity Act dealing with harassment in employment was amended after the Equal Opportunity Tribunal had previously held that the Act did not apply, and could not provide relief, in circumstances where the person harassed and the alleged harasser were employed by different employers. The amendment ensured that a complaint of harassment could be brought against a person who was not employed by the same employer as the person harassed. The amended provision commenced operation in January 1993. The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this. 2. The government is always amenable to working with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity on bringing about changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, where it is considered necessary to do so in the public interest.
The Sex Discrimination Act was amended to remove the requirement altogether that the person harassed demonstrate that as a result of taking objection to the unwelcome harassment he or she had been disadvantaged, or had a reasonable belief that such disadvantage would result from taking objection. The new provision, section 28A, only required that in all the circumstances, when viewed reasonably, the person harassed would be offended or humiliated by the conduct constituting the harassment. Hence, the burden of having to demonstrate that a disadvantage did, or would, follow the taking objection to the harassment was removed. Section 28A and other provisions relating to sexual harassment in various areas of life, including employment, also commenced operation in January 1993. It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this.
It is the view of the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity, as with her predecessor, that the provisions in the Equal Opportunity Act relating to sexual harassment could be improved by reflecting those in the Sex Discrimination Act. The Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Commissioner reported only recently that sexual harassment in the workplace remains at an unacceptably high level. The number of complaints of sexual harassment received by Equal Opportunity Commission in WA confirms this.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.