iscover
MinterEllison is facing a lawsuit in the Federal Court from a former employee who alleges that she was bullied, discriminated against, overworked, and subject to “humiliation” during her tenure.
Alfreda Garnsey, formerly a client monies administrator at BigLaw firm MinterEllison, has filed a lawsuit against her previous employer based on allegations of disability discrimination, adverse action, and breach of duty of care – seeking close to $765,000 in remedies.
Beginning her tenure with the firm in 2019, Garnsey worked in the infrastructure, construction and property team (ICP team), where she was responsible for processing client monies receipted into and paid out of trust and controlled accounts.
Midway through 2019, Garnsey alleged numerous contentious events had occurred within and around the ICP team, including the engagement of an external registered clinical psychologist to investigate “significant” health and safety risks.
According to Garnsey, the external psychologist found examples of bullying and inappropriate behaviours, a culture that permeated psychological harm, and a number of external complaints about the ICP team.
Around this time, Garnsey also alleged that she was experiencing an excessive workload, alerting her manager that she would work additional hours to complete that workload, and be provided time off in lieu.
In November of 2019, Garnsey alleged that an employee engaged to support the ICP team suffered a mental health event in the workplace during work hours.
Garnsey claimed that these events culminated in a meeting conducted by MinterEllison chief executive Virginia Briggs with the ICP team, where she relayed words to the effect of “if you people don’t change your behaviour, heads will roll”.
MinterEllison denied these claims, instead asserting that the external psychologist carried out employee workshops – not an investigation.
The firm also denied the assertion of the “heads will roll” statement, claiming that Briggs’ overarching message was based on the behaviour of team members needing to improve and overall contribution to positive team culture.
Garnsey alleged that the external psychologist did, in fact, carry out coaching workshops after the findings made during the investigation – but also claimed that these ceased at the end of 2019, and MinterEllison failed to follow up with any further steps to address the health and safety risks within the ICP team.
Excessive workload
During the back end of 2019, Garnsey worked throughout both Christmas and New Year’s to complete the “excessive workload” allocated to her, to which she requested some form of time in lieu, but was allegedly denied.
When she continually expressed grievances with this request denial and excessive workload, her manager allegedly said words to the effect of: “You’ll never catch up” and later words to the effect of everyone was “in the same boat”.
In September 2021, Garnsey became unwell with work-related stress and distress and commenced a period of personal leave.
Upon her return in October, she informed the firm of her disability and requested reasonable adjustments, which included a reduction to her workload and the provision of a direct support worker – which she claims were not delivered. Garnsey constituted this non-adjustment to her disability by the firm as discrimination in her lawsuit.
The firm, however, disputed that Garnsey never clarified what her disability was or provided any medical evidence of her disability, as well as claiming she never requested adjustments for said disability.
Bullying allegations
Garnsey claimed she experienced bullying, humiliation, and belittlement either by or in front of ICP team members. On one occasion, her manager told her she was “too sensitive”, and on another, a colleague referred to her as “slow” over an email correspondence, leaving her “dejected, saddened, and humiliated”.
According to Garnsey, one colleague, in particular, harassed and bullied her through “badgering, repeated follow-ups, and aggressive conduct in emails”, which included the use of caps lock, underlining, bolding in correspondence. Garnsey was also allegedly told that “no one in the workplace wanted to speak to her”.
She reported these incidents to both her manager and respective HR leaders, according to her statement.
Furthermore, near the end of her employment, she was told that “she had ruined everyone’s Christmas mood by raising a query during a work meeting”, was excluded by colleagues, and publicly humiliated in front of other colleagues.
MinterEllison denied that Garnsey was subjected to repeated incidents of bullying, retorting that Garnsey herself was accused of inappropriate conduct and involved in interpersonal disagreements and conflicts – claiming that by the end of her tenure, Garnsey had been the subject of multiple complaints by her colleagues.
The firm presented that they attempted to involve her in the team travel from the office to the Christmas party, but Garnsey had “an immovable hair appointment” and “she did not work from the office on that day”, opting to travel to the gathering alone.
Psychological injury
Garnsey ultimately left MinterEllison in February 2022 after becoming unfit for work due to a psychological injury – with her evidence showing that she recorded a whole person impairment (WPI) of 45 per cent.
The firm, however, claimed that Garnsey was “unhappy” with the outcome of an investigation into one of her bullying claims. After being informed that the claim was investigated but could not be substantiated, she allegedly ended the meeting abruptly and never returned to work.
In a statement, a MinterEllison spokesperson said: “Given the matter is before the courts, it would be inappropriate to comment.
“What we will say is that we value our people, and they are of the utmost importance to us.”
Garnsey is seeking just over $765,000 for a remedy, with non-economic loss (general damages), which includes “pain, suffering, loss of amenities, loss of expectation of life”, accounting for $200,000 alone.
RELATED TERMS
According to the Australian Human Rights Commission, discrimination occurs when one individual or group of people is regarded less favourably than another because of their origins or certain personality traits. When a regulation or policy is unfairly applied to everyone yet disadvantages some persons due to a shared personal trait, that is also discrimination.
Harassment is defined as persistent behaviour or acts that intimidate, threaten, or uncomfortably affect other employees at work. Because of anti-discrimination laws and the Fair Work Act of 2009, harassment in Australia is prohibited on the basis of protected characteristics.
Kace O'Neill
Kace O'Neill is a Graduate Journalist for HR Leader. Kace studied Media Communications and Maori studies at the University of Otago, he has a passion for sports and storytelling.
