The PM v workplace standards

The furore surrounding Anthony Albanese’s Kylie Minogue comments shows that not even the nation’s Prime Minister is immune to expectations of acceptable workplace conduct, even if the role precludes traditional HR consequences.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s appearance in the “Bush Deep” podcast – and resulting backlash after he reluctantly participated in a game of “shag, marry, date” – has raised questions concerning the image of a modern-day Prime Minister and the unique HR standards of the role.

The colloquial podcast, hosted by self-proclaimed “wildly inappropriate journalist” Nikki Osborne, AKA “Bushie’, describes its content as “loose, tongue in cheek, and very, very funny” – something that, arguably, should have precluded Albanese’s participation altogether.

The moment in question came after Osborne asked Albanese a series of rapid-fire questions, including to choose between “shag, marry, date” between high-profile Australian women, Nicole Kidman, Rhonda Burchmore, and Kylie Minogue.

While Albanese seemed initially reluctant to answer directly, noting: “I just got married, I’m only six months in,” he then relented after Osborne said: “But if it goes t-ts up, let’s just pretend,” by responding, “Kylie, clearly.”

In what appears to be an effort to avoid the crass language of the game, yet maintain a “down-to-earth” image, Albanese’s response nevertheless makes him a willing participant in the “locker-room” style comedy.

HR Leader reached out to workplace relations lawyers Michael Byrnes of Swaab and Kingston Reid partner Beth Robinson to examine whether the Prime Minister is held to higher or lower HR standards for a public-facing and representative position.

According to Byrnes, “in one sense, the Prime Minister is held to a lower standard as he can’t be ‘sacked’ in the conventional sense for serious misconduct”.

While it is known that they can be removed from their role by their party, “that is usually linked to loss of popularity or ambitions of parliamentary colleagues”.

However, Byrnes maintained that the holder of such a senior and prominent role in Australian life does mean “the PM is expected to engage in, and model, appropriate conduct at all times, and as such is held to a higher moral standard than the average person”.

While he noted the participation in a game of “shag, marry, date” itself within a regular workplace would be fraught, the comments made by a Prime Minister were, as Byrnes highlighted, “crass and boorish and not becoming of a Prime Minister”.

However, he noted that the context and nature of the comments deserve consideration.

“He did not raise the matter himself; he was asked about it. He at least initially provided some resistance to the questions,” Byrnes said.

Many believe he should have maintained his resistance.

Byrnes said: “While the effect of his comments was that he would ‘shag’ Kylie Minogue, he didn’t actually say that in terms.”

He noted that such context would be considered in matters before an industrial tribunal.

Bynes said that HR would similarly consider the context and exact wording when addressing comments of this nature within the workplace, noting that even discussing female celebrities in this way could be considered inappropriate.

Similarly, Robinson noted that “Australian parliaments are not typical workplaces, but they are workplaces”.

She said, “behavioural standards in Australian parliaments at state or federal level have been the subject of intense scrutiny”, but it is only recently that a formal conduct code was applied to federal politicians.

On the intensified scrutiny on parliamentary behaviour, she referenced the Behaviour Code for Australian Parliamentarians, introduced in October 2024 following the 2021 “Set the Standard” review by Kate Jenkins, noting that any discussions about political conduct are now applied as such.

In this context, Robinson said: “There is no doubt that the Prime Minister is held to a higher standard, not because he’s a politician, but because he is the leader of the Australian government.”

Albanese, she said, had “imposed higher standards on employers throughout the country to prevent sexual harassment”.

In this way, “the issue then isn’t necessarily whether the comment was unlawful or intended to offend, it’s whether it reflects the standards of respect, judgement, and culture that organisations now expect from senior leaders”.

“That question has become far more important than whether something can be dismissed as ‘just a joke’,” she said.

Robinson also agreed that the game in question is disrespectful, but that context is crucial within the workplace - operating in a grey area that “has the potential to constitute sexual harassment”.

“The defence of a ‘locker room’ talk or a ‘joke’ would be unlikely to protect an employer or an employee in a conventional workplace environment if a claim or complaint were brought about the ‘game’ itself or a comment made in response,” she said.

In this way, Byrnes explained that HR should ensure that workplace policies are not just known but central to employee training “so that they are understood in practice”.

“Intention is not relevant. While comments might be intended to be light-hearted or jovial, that of itself is not going to be a defence if they are of a sexual nature and can cause offence,” Byrnes said.

A greater takeaway for senior leaders or executives appearing on social media or in more informal interviews, Byrnes said, is to be aware of where the boundaries lie for the organisation or sector they represent, and to act in accordance with them.

In the same way, being aware that alternative media – while a draw for politicians looking to be seen as relevant and down-to-earth – pose additional risks due to their colloquial, independent, or sometimes frivolous natures.

Media such as podcasts, Byrnes continued, can disarm unprepared guests with their less challenging appearance on the surface, while also seeking to achieve a viral moment.

Robinson also reinforced that games or comments of this nature “should be discouraged as inappropriate in the workplace, or workplace context” – including at events such as Christmas parties.

She said: “For leaders, setting and role modelling the standard of behaviour you expect is critical to success. This includes understanding the difference between harmless games and banter, and comments which have the potential to create a hostile environment, or to offend.”

HR Leader received the following statement from the Prime Minister’s office: “I apologise unequivocally for the comments.”

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.