❓ The Minister addresses workplace bullying, highlighting the state government's preventative measures and criticising the federal Work Choices changes for removing unfair dismissal protections, citing examples of bullying cases and political opposition.
AnsweredQoN 781Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In light of the attention now being given to preventing bullying in the workplace, does the minister have any examples of how people have successfully dealt with being bullied? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
There is a growing concern about bullying in the workplace, and we as an employer in the state public sector have sought to put in place a whole range of procedures so that we can stop bullying and try to deal with it. That is an ongoing policy and we need to make sure that we do it better. I am very concerned that with the federal government’s Work Choices changes, we will see the real defence to bullying - that is, the defence against unfair dismissal - simply swept aside. A woman came to my electorate office last week because she was very upset about the Howard government’s industrial relations changes. This young woman had worked in the hospitality industry for quite some years and had a profile of wonderful references from a whole range of companies she had worked for. When a new manager took over at one particular hotel, she found that he was very much a bully. It quickly got to a situation in which she was simply not coping because of the pressure put on her and she was fired within a few weeks. She was able to lodge an unfair dismissal case, she was vindicated and she won that case. If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: There is a growing concern about bullying in the workplace, and we as an employer in the state public sector have sought to put in place a whole range of procedures so that we can stop bullying and try to deal with it. That is an ongoing policy and we need to make sure that we do it better. I am very concerned that with the federal government’s Work Choices changes, we will see the real defence to bullying - that is, the defence against unfair dismissal - simply swept aside. A woman came to my electorate office last week because she was very upset about the Howard government’s industrial relations changes. This young woman had worked in the hospitality industry for quite some years and had a profile of wonderful references from a whole range of companies she had worked for. When a new manager took over at one particular hotel, she found that he was very much a bully. It quickly got to a situation in which she was simply not coping because of the pressure put on her and she was fired within a few weeks. She was able to lodge an unfair dismissal case, she was vindicated and she won that case. If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
There is a growing concern about bullying in the workplace, and we as an employer in the state public sector have sought to put in place a whole range of procedures so that we can stop bullying and try to deal with it. That is an ongoing policy and we need to make sure that we do it better. I am very concerned that with the federal government’s Work Choices changes, we will see the real defence to bullying - that is, the defence against unfair dismissal - simply swept aside. A woman came to my electorate office last week because she was very upset about the Howard government’s industrial relations changes. This young woman had worked in the hospitality industry for quite some years and had a profile of wonderful references from a whole range of companies she had worked for. When a new manager took over at one particular hotel, she found that he was very much a bully. It quickly got to a situation in which she was simply not coping because of the pressure put on her and she was fired within a few weeks. She was able to lodge an unfair dismissal case, she was vindicated and she won that case. If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: There is a growing concern about bullying in the workplace, and we as an employer in the state public sector have sought to put in place a whole range of procedures so that we can stop bullying and try to deal with it. That is an ongoing policy and we need to make sure that we do it better. I am very concerned that with the federal government’s Work Choices changes, we will see the real defence to bullying - that is, the defence against unfair dismissal - simply swept aside. A woman came to my electorate office last week because she was very upset about the Howard government’s industrial relations changes. This young woman had worked in the hospitality industry for quite some years and had a profile of wonderful references from a whole range of companies she had worked for. When a new manager took over at one particular hotel, she found that he was very much a bully. It quickly got to a situation in which she was simply not coping because of the pressure put on her and she was fired within a few weeks. She was able to lodge an unfair dismissal case, she was vindicated and she won that case. If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
There is a growing concern about bullying in the workplace, and we as an employer in the state public sector have sought to put in place a whole range of procedures so that we can stop bullying and try to deal with it. That is an ongoing policy and we need to make sure that we do it better. I am very concerned that with the federal government’s Work Choices changes, we will see the real defence to bullying - that is, the defence against unfair dismissal - simply swept aside. A woman came to my electorate office last week because she was very upset about the Howard government’s industrial relations changes. This young woman had worked in the hospitality industry for quite some years and had a profile of wonderful references from a whole range of companies she had worked for. When a new manager took over at one particular hotel, she found that he was very much a bully. It quickly got to a situation in which she was simply not coping because of the pressure put on her and she was fired within a few weeks. She was able to lodge an unfair dismissal case, she was vindicated and she won that case. If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
If one does not have that backstop of an unfair dismissal procedure, whatever happens in bullying, one simply has no protection. People either leave the job because their health is suffering or they have to put up with it. I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
I will give one other example, which happened under the last Liberal government regime. What Howard is doing has all the similarities, even though it is more extreme. This example relates to a man named Mr Fox who worked for a mine near Meekatharra on a Western Australian workplace agreement put in place by the last Liberal government. Mr Fox, along with everyone else there, had his employment conditions changed so that the employer’s payment for him to go to Meekatharra and back was simply cancelled. It was stated in the contract of employment for employees that they would have their transport to and from the mine paid. The manager simply said, “I’m stopping that; I’m not going to pay you that money.” Most of the staff were bullied and they started a dispute resolution process. Only Mr Fox went through the process and had a determination made that the payment was in his contract of employment and that the employer should pay it. However, after winning that case and going back to work, he was dismissed because he stood up to the bullying. He took an unfair dismissal case and he won with exemplary damages. Under what Mr Howard is seeking to do - the bullying applied to everyone at that mine but only Mr Fox stood up to it - that bullying would be effective because there would be no redress to an unfair dismissal. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He thinks that when people are bullied and they have their contractual rights taken off them, if they want to stay in the job, they have to put up with it. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party thinks that is a good thing. He wants workers treated that way. I say to him that if that is the view of the Liberal Party, it has no support from the people of Western Australia. Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
Several opposition members interjected. The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER : I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
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.