$4m lawsuit against NRL club: Tough training or toxic work environment?

Sporting environments can be competitive, cutthroat, and sometimes hostile. Like many business spaces, they are results-driven organisations, which can often lead to toxicity arising in many forms.

Former Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs player Jackson Topine has filed a $4 million lawsuit against his old NRL team and its trainer, Travis Touma, alleging “unlawful corporal punishment” following an incident that occurred last year where he was forced to wrestle 30-35 of his teammates.

Topine, only 22 years of age, claims that he suffered “psychiatric injury” and “physical and mental impairment” as a result of the incident. Topine arrived 10 minutes late to training, which led to the wrestling being the consequence for his lack of punctuality.

Are sporting athletes beyond the employee realm?

Professional sporting athletes are often disregarded by the general public as “workers” or employees as they are considered to be in a privileged position, earning big money for playing a game. It’s difficult to convince a nurse or tradie that someone on a million-dollar salary who kicks a ball for a living is similar to them and, therefore, is prone to exploitation from their employer or toxicity within their job.

This mindset has resulted in Topine seemingly being scolded and branded as “soft” by most of the general public and the rugby league world. Former NRL players are also jumping in to defend the actions of the trainer and the Bulldogs, with NRL 360 host Braith Anasta labelling Topine’s claims as “crazy”.

“It’s crazy. I can’t get my head around it. This guy has rocked up to training late, so when you rock up to training late, you get tough discipline. You get taught not to let your teammates down because if you rock up late in the game, you cost your team. This happens every day with every club and every player,” said Anasta.

Sport is a unique terrain when viewed from an employment perspective. In any other workplace across Australia, being late obviously has its consequences; however, none would be as physically, mentally, or emotionally draining as the treatment that Topine endured.

In a time where mental health has never been more important, the organisation that you work for has an obligation to ensure that psychosocial hazards that can cause psychological harm are negated or limited in relative capacity. That is the set precedent across a number of Australian workplaces, yet sporting organisations, due to the competitive environment, seem to sometimes float above that standard.

According to SafeWork Australia, the following examples can be classed as psychosocial hazards:

• Poor support
• Lack of role clarity
• Traumatic events or material
• Inadequate role or recognition
• Job demands
• Bullying
• Conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions

According to the statement from Topine’s lawsuit, the player experienced “psychiatric injury, deprivation of liberty, humiliation, indignity, physical exhaustion, physical discomfort, anxiety, embarrassment and fear”.

Other statements included claims that teammates actually tried to help Topine but were told by the trainer things like, “Don’t let him up. If he’s down, jump on him straight away. Don’t congratulate him or help him. He deserved that; he was f---ing late!”

Reverting to the psychosocial elements, these comments and actions would be deemed hazardous for any employee. The legal and moral duty of care of any organisation is to mitigate these hazards, and in this case, that duty was not fulfilled.

Wests Tigers and NSW Blues legend Benny Elias made the duty of care claim and threw his support behind Topine, unlike many of his fellow rugby league custodians.

“We are in an environment where there’s an employer and an employee who is the player, and we have a duty of care to make sure these players (are OK). Whether you like it or not, that is the facts, there’s a very fine line, and we don’t know, that’s why we are going to court,” Elias said.

“Mentally and physically, he believes he’s been doomed to (not) play ever again ... you can do it the hard way and the right way at the same time. You don’t have to be a genius; unfortunately, in the good old days, we’d turn a blind eye and life goes on. I agree with penalising someone if they’ve done something wrong, but to the effect of breaking this kid, that’s a real problem.”

Elias believes that this case will be a “landmark decision” for the NRL and the game of rugby league as a whole.

The court case in itself will set a powerful precedent going forward. It will either create a new and, in many eyes, unnecessary layer of accountability for sporting organisations or instead keep the status quo in place in terms of the treatment of players in a competitive environment.

Landmark decision

Overall, the decision will be a monumental one and could affect the trajectory of the NRL going forward. If Topine is successful, there could be a spike in players, past or present, coming forward to recount similar experiences that have had a detrimental effect on them.

HR Leader reached out to the Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) for any comments on the matter. “The issues raised appear to engage areas of employment law that sit outside the direct terms of the CBA. Like any employee, they are entitled to do that, and we support them pursuing their rights,” said a statement from the RLPA.

“We have engaged with Jackson and his management in relation to his wellbeing and contractual rights and entitlements, and they are aware of the support available from the RLPA.”

The Bulldogs themselves stand firm on the fact that they and their trainer did nothing outside of the normal punishments that players endure when they fail to comply with the teams’ standards.

"The Canterbury-Bankstown board unanimously agreed that it would vigorously defend the club and its employee Travis Touma against the claim lodged today by a former player. The club will be making no further comments at this time,” said chairman Adam Driussi.

Many within the rugby league world will fear for the integrity and toughness of the game if this lawsuit is successful, and it would be remiss not to acknowledge the unique nature of being an NRL player.

As Bulldogs coach Cameron Ciraldo put it: “The NRL is not for everyone.” It does take a certain type of person to pursue a career in professional sports; mental toughness could be described as the number one attribute needed to survive in that profession, making it somewhat of an outlier both in terms of the physical and mental strain. All in all, it is not an easy endeavour.

However, in the same breath, it is a job and it is employment. As employers, sports organisations have that responsibility of fundamentally caring for and protecting their employees from physical and mental hazards that are more than likely to arise in their pressurised profession. Merely labelling someone as soft for succumbing to the demanding nature of their profession is a rather outdated act.

Instead, in a sport that struggles with mental health issues, the duty of care for players should be at the forefront of a sporting organisation’s checklist rather than their results-driven goals. A 2023 report on the mental health experiences of NRL players highlighted that 35 per cent per cent of NRL athletes had sought support for their mental health.

With these issues being so prevalent, it is imperative that sporting organisations, going forward, put a concerted effort towards negating those psychosocial hazards for their employees. It will be for the betterment of these players and perhaps the club as a whole.