How to Prevent Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Unfortunately, dealing with allegations of sexual harassment in the workplace is an issue for many employers. Sexual harassment can take many forms, and cases are rarely "open and shut".

Once allegations of sexual harassment or misconduct have been made, they must be appropriately investigated and dealt with. However, prevention is always better than cure.

Let's take a look at employer obligations, the scale of the problem and how employers can help prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.

obligation to provide a safe workplace 

Employers are required by law to provide a safe workplace for all employees. This is enshrined in the workplace health and safety legislation throughout Australia (for example, s19 of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW)).

Legislation requires employers to provide for physical safety, for example, by preventing unsafe worksite practices which could cause injuries to employees. It also extends to ensuring that employees are protected against physical and psychological harm caused by sexual harassment or assault, and mental harm (such as could be caused by bullying or harassment).

The facts - workplace sexual harassment

A 2018 sexual harassment study conducted by the Australian Human Rights Commission, found that one in three Australian workers claim to have been sexually harassed in the workplace in the past five years. This figure has increased from one in five workers in 2012, and one in ten in 2003. Of course, this may be due to employees becoming more aware of what sexual harassment is and what their rights are in relation to reporting or taking steps to report and prevent it. However, it is still a worrying statistic.

Interestingly, although sexual harassment affects both genders (with 26% of men and 39% of women interviewed reporting experiences of sexual harassment), those most likely to be harassed in the workplace are aged between 18 and 29. Moreover, despite the fairly equal gender split in victimology, the overwhelming majority (80%) of harassers are men.

Tips for preventing sexual harassment in the workplace 

There are a number of strategies that can help employers nip sexual harassment in the bud. These include:

  • Management support. It is essential that all levels of management, but particularly the highest levels of the executive team, embrace an anti-harassment culture. This is particularly important when one considers that, at least anecdotally, there may be a perception that sexual victimisation is a top-down phenomenon. It is important for management to demonstrate that no type of sexual harassment will be tolerated in the workplace. Similarly, the executives of any workplace must demonstrate that they will deal swiftly and appropriately with those who have been found to have engaged in sexual harassment. Ultimately, it is essential that the entire business receives the message that sexual victimisation will not be tolerated on any level. This also means that appropriate conduct by managers should always be encouraged.
  • Creation of a sexual harassment policy. A clear, detailed and easily accessible sexual harassment policy should be created, setting out exactly what the company's position on such harassment is. This should include the specific behaviours that will constitute sexual harassment and will not be tolerated. It must also be widely circulated amongst staff, ideally with a sign-off required confirming that staff have read and understood the policy.
  • Provision of training. Again, this should be rolled out company-wide, and conducted on a regular basis. It is important that there is general awareness, not only of what is defined to be sexual harassment, but an understanding of what rights and remedies are available to those who feel that they have been a victim of this type of harassment.
  • Encouraging a positive workplace environment. By implementing the above steps, a positive environment will be fostered, which will also encourage staff at all levels to be proactive about preventing sexual harassment or calling it out when it occurs.

the need for employer action

In addition to the general requirement to provide safe working conditions for staff, there are other positive obligations on employers in relation to sexual harassment.

For example, in Victoria, the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (VIC) imposes a positive duty on employers to prevent any sort of sexual harassment from occurring.

Similarly, employers Australia-wide may be deemed to be vicariously liable for the conduct of their employees, if it can be demonstrated that they did not take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment (per the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)).

In order to protect the business, it is crucial that immediate and appropriate action by way of response to a sexual harassment notification occurs. Training managers and staff about sexual harassment and the company's stance on it is vital.

Sexual harassment in the workplace continues to be a great concern for both employees and employers. Taking active steps and educating staff is crucial in reducing the prevalence of sexual harassment in the workplace. Accordingly, WISE Workplace offers employers training programs to address and investigate workplace sexual harassment, as well as independent investigation services to review such behaviours. 


Supporting Mental Health in the Workplace

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, October 09, 2019

Employers understand that it is their responsibility to provide a safe workplace. Yet unlike physical health safety concerns and hazards such as lifting, tripping, sun exposure and dust reduction, many employers find themselves uncertain about how to support the mental health and wellbeing of their staff.

The first and most powerful antidote to this uncertainty is becoming informed. For business owners and managers, this includes stepping up and finding answers about common mental health challenges, causes and implications in the workplace.

Let's take a look at some of these factors, and how employers can support their workers' mental wellbeing.

COMMON TYPES OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES 

Thankfully, many mental health disorders have become better understood and less stigmatised. While not perfect, attitudes towards mental illnesses such as anxiety and depression have changed and are better understood now, than even a decade ago.

However, even though there is understanding that 1 in every 4 Australians will experience some form of mental health issue during their lives, the cliches about non-physical illnesses still abound. This can include the idea that all depressed people are sad, or that anxious people just need to learn to calm down. Another painfully familiar idea is that people with a mental illness are inherently unstable.

For less-understood conditions such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, OCD, ADD and PTSD, the accommodation of these and the provision of necessary reasonable adjustments where required in the workplace and beyond, remains incredibly low. Between 6-8% of all adult mental illnesses will be one of these mentioned, so there is every chance that a person in your workplace is currently living with such a challenge on a daily basis.

One common misconception is that people with such mental health conditions are somehow defective - and can't or won't work. Yet the reality is that many high functioning people being treated for mood disorders and other chronic mental health conditions are living and working effectively around Australia at this moment.

Step out against stigma

Sadly, Australians who are working despite carrying a mental health issue often feel that they need to work faster/harder/longer/more to prove their worth - and keep their 'problem' quiet. Women, migrants and those with disabilities can certainly understand this kind of historical over-compensation in the workplace. So, when events arise that could exacerbate the situation, employers might only find out once the worst of the damage has already been done. It is vital therefore to build preventative mechanisms, systems and practises for reducing the kinds of workplace behaviours that can both create and exacerbate mental health issues. 

the key contributors to mental health issues 

The key contributors to workplace mental issues include bullying and harassment, excessive workload, repetitive work routines, and stress. The painful and devastating effects of bullying and harassment are difficult for any worker to face. For employees burdened with a mental health challenge, the impacts can be debilitating.

As mentioned, mental illness can often be carried silently in the workplace, largely due to stigma. If a workload becomes excessive, an employee might not speak up for fear of reprisal. Employers need to put in place systems to monitor these burdens. Repetitive, mundane work can also lead to health and safety issues for workers. One problem that was identified in the Industrial Revolution is that humans need variety! And stress is another 'top 5' cause or primary exacerbator of mental health problems in the workplace: uncertainty, discord and constant change can all build up and cause health concerns.  

adverse outcomes for the workplace

Absenteeism is an unfortunate but not surprising outcome when people are not supported in the workplace. For those with an existing mental health issue, workplace stressors such as bullying and harassment can cause  an exacerbation of the illness. At times like these, attendance can be extremely difficult, if not impossible for an unwell worker to maintain. In a similar way, when mental health issues are not supported in the workplace, reduced productivity is the inevitable consequence. To produce the goods and services at a high and continuous level, workers need to feel well and to feel supported, safe and valued. 

employer obligations to health and safety 

It can be somewhat more familiar for employers to think about workplace health and safety only in terms of physical wellbeing. This narrow notion is not correct and a safe workplace also requires understanding and protection of all workers and particularly those with mental health needs. This necessitates taking the time to understand particular mental health conditions more thoroughly, and to take steps towards ensuring a safer and healthier workplace.

Providing safety to employees from direct and indirect mental harm in the workplace involves much more than merely paying lip service to the notion of promoting good mental health and the occasional 'Are you okay'? query. When an employee develops or divulges a mental health issue, the first step is to provide and encourage open communication. Employers can show their interest in learning more about the condition and what might be done to assist the employee at a practical level.

They should make any and all reasonable adjustments required, to support the employee which may include offering or organising flexible working arrangements, if this is something that might assist the worker in question. Anti-bullying policies should be regularly reviewed and strengthened to ensure that the chances of a workplace mental injury occurring are reduced.

An audit to identify a comprehensive suite of risk strategies and processes should be undertaken, to ensure that the workplace is the safest and healthiest that it can be - from any standpoint.

stepping up to a well workplace 

It makes sense for employers to make a commitment to the mental health and wellbeing of staff. As well as producing excellent improvements in absenteeism, reduction in staff turnover, productivity and injury rates, it's also simply the right thing to do. If you'd like more information and education on mental health in the workplace, check out our series of articles on this topic, starting with Mental Health in the Workplace


Outsourcing or In-House Investigations?

Vince Scopelliti - Thursday, October 03, 2019

For many businesses, one of the critical HR questions is whether investigations into alleged employee misconduct or misbehaviour should be outsourced or conducted in-house.

Depending on the nature of the business and the complaint, it may not always be appropriate or cost-effective for investigations to be referred externally.

However, in other circumstances, particularly when the allegations involve potential criminal conduct or there is an actual or perceived conflict, outsourcing may be the best option.

We examine the different circumstances in which investigations might best be outsourced or kept in-house.

outsourcing vs internal 

The key benefit of conducting workplace investigations internally is the ability to potentially deal with a matter swiftly and cost-effectively. The obvious reason here is that staff tasked with conducting an internal investigation, already have an understanding of the internal processes and procedures of the business. Although time away from normal duties is likely to be required, there is no additional cost associated with tasking existing staff to conduct an internal investigation.

On the other hand, depending on the nature of the allegation, existing staff may be lacking in capacity or capability to properly conduct the investigation. This is particularly likely to be the case if the allegations relate to potential criminal conduct which requires police involvement.

In addition, if the allegations are sensitive or have been made against a staff member who would ordinarily be involved in conducting the investigation, it may not be appropriate for the investigation to occur internally.

Whether the investigation is outsourced or conducted internally, it is essential that there are clear delineations as to who will be conducting the investigation. Further, the ultimate investigator must be provided with the applicable investigation policy and procedures which must be followed.

risks of handling an investigation in-house

As noted, there are numerous potential risks of handling an investigation in-house. Chief amongst these is the fact that the internal staff may lack the necessary skills or training to adequately understand the complex nature of the investigation. This could have significant ramifications if there are demonstrable gaps in the process, as this may ultimately invalidate the findings and any final decision which is made.

Having staff without the requisite experience or skills, conducting an investigation may also mean a failure to comply with legal obligations. In the event that the investigatory process results in termination of employment, litigation or other legal action, any failure to duly comply with all the legal and regulatory requirements, may potentially result in an adverse decision for the company.

The possible apprehension of bias in an internal investigation is significant, particularly if the employees who are conducting the investigation have a close personal or professional relationship with the complainant, the respondent or any of the witnesses. In a small company, or in a situation where a member in a senior leadership position has allegations levelled against them, this potential apprehension of bias is even greater.

This could also result in complaints of pre-determined outcomes, where staff involved in the process may argue that the investigation was not conducted in accordance with the principles of procedural fairness. Any relationship (whether positive or negative) between the investigatory staff and the parties involved in the investigation is likely to come under significant scrutiny. This may open up the investigatory team to suggestions that the investigation was not conducted impartially or fairly.

Factors for considering whether to outsource 

Impartiality and transparency in the investigative process are always crucial considerations. In situations where there are especially sensitive allegations or the staff involved are likely to resort to post-investigatory litigation, any potential concerns regarding failures in process or impartiality can be addressed by outsourcing the entire investigation.

Similarly, if time is of the essence (particularly when staff have been temporarily stood down and it is important that the investigation process is concluded in an expeditious fashion) outsourcing the investigation may be the preferable outcome. 

This is because external investigators are able to devote themselves completely to the investigation process, while existing employees will most likely need to continue on with their day-to-day work.

the benefits of outsourcing

Although there is a cost associated with the outsourcing of an investigation, there are added benefits. Investigators with specialist expertise are able to deal with complex matters, and are best placed to provide reports which are more likely to be relied upon by the Fair Work Commission.

The majority of contemporary workplace investigations come with their own set of challenges and complexities. If you do not have the time or resources to conduct an investigation or you require an experienced investigator, WISE offers both supported and full service investigations to best assist.  

Elder Abuse in Care

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, September 18, 2019

The most vulnerable members of our society are generally those with disabilities, the very young and the elderly. People who are vulnerable are at greater risk of being abused or otherwise mistreated, especially in residential care facilities. This is currently being made distressingly clear at the aged care Royal Commission. 

We discuss what elder abuse in care looks like, how it can occur and what factors can make an impact on the investigation of alleged abuse.

WHAt is elder abuse? 

"Elder abuse" is an umbrella term, which encompasses a number of forms of abuse, including but not limited to:

  • Physical abuse. This means that a person, often a carer or loved one, is deliberately inflicting physical injury or pain on an elderly person. Importantly, this also includes the use of physical and chemical restraints.
  • Psychological/emotional abuse. It is difficult to define exactly what constitutes emotional abuse. However, examples include making threats or intimidation, humiliating the elderly patient, failing to provide access to services (such as restricting access to clean clothing or washing facilities) or telling the patient that they have dementia when they don't.
  • Social abuse. This includes restricting a patient the right to see or interact with their family or loved ones.
  • Financial abuse. This is one of the most common types of elder abuse. It involves mismanaging, improperly using or otherwise dealing dishonestly with an older person's financial assets. Examples include forcing the elderly patient to provide bank details so that the carer can use them for their own purposes. Another example is forcing the patient to sign over money or goods in their will.
  • Sexual abuse. This is dealing with an elderly person in a sexual way without consent. It ranges from speaking about sexual activities to inappropriate sexual contact.
  • Neglect. Another very common type of elder abuse, this involves withholding basic human rights such as food, shelter, hygiene or medical assistance from the patient.
Like many other types of abuse, elder abuse is significantly under-reported. This is because of shame, fear of reprisal, or in certain circumstances the elderly patient not understanding that they are being abused. However, according to a report published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, up to 14% of older Australians may be subjected to elder abuse.

In late 2018, a Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety was announced. Amongst its terms of reference is the specific requirement to consider poor care, including "mistreatment and all forms of abuse". An interim report commenting on initial findings is due to be published by 31 October 2019.

WHAt are the signs of elder abuse? 

Determining whether an elderly Australian in care is the victim of abuse can be extremely difficult. However, some key factors which can cause a suspicion of abuse include:

  • Sudden personality changes such as unusual anger, anxiety, fear or depression;
  • Obvious poor personal hygiene;
  • Changes in eating and sleeping patterns;
  • Changes in social activity and interaction such as becoming non-verbal, becoming isolated and lack of motivation;
  • A failure for simple medical conditions to clear up as expected (indicating maltreatment);
  • Inexplicable disappearance of money or possessions; and
  • Visible signs of injury or trauma.

Who is most at risk? 

Although potentially all older Australian in residential care facilities are at risk, those with mental health issues are at greater risk of being abused. This is because the victim may be confused themselves, about whether the abuse is even occurring. Further, even if the victim does make a complaint, those with organic brain issues and diseases or significant mental health problems may not be believed.

Challenges of an investigation 

Investigations into elder abuse are challenging due to a number of different factors. These include low reporting rates and difficulty in obtaining accurate reporting and evidence about the specific details of abuse. There are unlikely to be third party witnesses because abuse can and often does, occur in the victim's private room. Victims may also be poor witnesses due to difficulties with memory and recall or other mental health illnesses and conditions.

The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety has revealed how the treatment of the elderly in aged care facilities can go unnoticed. If you require assistance into the investigation of elderly abuse complaints in a care setting, contact WISE to discuss your needs, and how we can help. Alternatively, we provide Investigating Abuse in Care training.

Uncovering the Steps of an Effective Investigation Process

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, June 26, 2019

For many employers, a workplace investigation process can appear quite challenging to navigate. Questions around the actual subject of the investigation, and who is best qualified to carry out this important task, can immediately arise.

The investigation process itself is characterised by a number of important processes that are designed to reduce the risk of negative perceptions and/or potential legal pitfalls at a later date.

We outline proven strategies for understanding and instigating a high-quality investigation process.

By using these, employers have the capability to implement a fair, thorough and professional investigation, from initial complaint management through to the presentation of an accurate and accessible report. 

Following a clear path

When a complaint arises in the workplace, employers might be tempted to launch straight into the fray and 'get to the bottom of things'. Yet such a tactic can be problematic on a number of levels.

First, compliance with existing policies and procedures concerning investigations is crucial, to ensure procedural fairness throughout the process. It can take time to confer with HR, re-read existing internal guides and to make a plan to investigate the complaint in an appropriate manner. 

Each workplace, employee and complaint is unique and employers are reminded to carefully assess their policy compliance obligations before starting down the investigative path.

Secondly, it is vital to ensure that procedural fairness is built into the entire investigative process. The way in which complaints are dealt with must be transparent and fair for all concerned. Results from an investigation process should be reliable. This is derived from robust interview techniques and document searches that are fair and transparent in nature.

A sound investigative process will also ensure the finality of outcomes, leaving no room for doubt. Complainants, witnesses and employers understandably desire a process where finality and clarity are achieved. 

A step-by-step investigative process

Let's take a look at the key steps of an effective investigation. You can find out more about each of these steps in the investigation process in our upcoming series of in-depth articles.

1. Receiving a complaint

It can be confronting for employers when required to deal with workplace complaints. Bullying, harassment, fraud, sexual harassment and child abuse are just some of the serious issues that can arise in workplace contexts. It is crucial that complaints are taken seriously and that actions are carried out in a measured fashion.

Employers should ensure that internal policies and procedures regarding the receipt of complaints are closely followed. The receipt of complaints involving what is known as 'reportable conduct' will additionally activate compulsory reporting regimes. This means that for certain types of alleged misconduct, employers are legally required to report to prescribed external bodies.

2. Establishing terms of reference

At the beginning of the investigative process, the investigator works with the client to define and limit the Terms of Reference (ToR). It is not appropriate to engage in broad-sweeping analyses of all circumstances that might possibly surround the complaint. The investigator and client work with the initial information, to confine the ToR to the essence of the complaint(s) made. An investigation can become too unwieldy if the boundaries of the ToR are vague, hazy or too broad. 

Perhaps most importantly, unclear ToRs can lead to accusations of uncertainty and unfairness for those parties affected. It can make sense to engage an external investigator in those circumstances where complaints, cross allegations and emotions are heightened within an organisation. Often, an objective outside person can provide the clarity needed to get the ToR right.

3. Letters of notification and allegation

Once thorough scoping has taken place, letters of notification need to be made to respondent, complainant and all relevant witnesses. This provides an important opportunity to communicate the nature of the investigation process, as well as the individual's involvement. The letter of notification describes what is being investigated; who the investigator is; the right to request an interview support person; as well as the need for all parties involved in the investigation to maintain confidentiality. 

With a slightly different purpose, the letter of allegations provides a clear description of the complaints that have been made against the respondent. This important piece of correspondence includes the particulars of allegations, any request for supporting documents, pending interview details, the option of having a support person present, as well as the importance of maintaining confidentiality at all times. All correspondence within the investigation should be clear, comprehensive and accessible by the relevant parties.

4. Interviewing techniques

When conducting an interview, the investigator must constantly consider how to maintain transparency and objectivity at all times. Yet, it is also necessary to build a suitable level of rapport with the complainant, the respondent and with witnesses.

One useful tool for running the interview process appropriately is the adoption of an interview framework.

The PEACE model was developed in the United Kingdom to help investigators conduct the fairest and most productive interview possible. With a useful acronym, the PEACE model helps the interviewer to step consistently through the process.

PLANNING: Examine what planning and preparation needs to occur before an interview.

ENGAGE: Choose methods that assist in building rapport with the respondent, complainant or witness.

ACCOUNT: Gather interviewee accounts in a logical and effective structure. Seek clarification where needed.

CLOSURE: Complete the interview politely and professionally.

EVALUATE: Review the contents of your transcript and take any necessary next steps.

Active listening is also a useful tool for interviewers conducting a workplace investigation. This involves giving close and undivided attention to the interviewee, plus being able to paraphrase accurately what has been said. Wherever possible 'open' questions should be asked - those that allow the person to respond in a narrative manner, based upon their recollections. Examples include 'How would you describe the work relationship between Fred and Frank?'.

5. Report writing

One of the most important aspects of a workplace investigation is the final written report. It is relied upon for ensuring compliance with recommendations, detailing any disciplinary actions and can form a defence against future claims. In accordance with Briginshaw, findings made with objectivity and upon the evidence available, are more likely to meet the evidentiary threshold in serious matters. Investigators should clearly determine if allegations are substantiated, unsubstantiated or if evidence is lacking. Being concise, following a logical sequence and ensuring that 'findings follow the evidence' are all important ways of creating a professional, sound final report.

6. Making findings

One of the last and most crucial tasks for the investigator is making findings. It can seem deceptively simple. This evidence was produced; this is the logical finding. Yet there is more to the equation than this.

It is important to present evidence contrary to your findings and to explain why this was less compelling than the preferred evidence. A clear and objective explanation is needed and can certainly be difficult to word at times. Findings should tie back to the analysis and should define which allegations have or have not been substantiated.

An indication of the weighting applied will be necessary, as will the relevance of the evidence in the context of the particular allegations. It should also be clear in the document that reasoning has taken place in the context of the organisation's policies - including whether or not one or more has been breached.

7. The role of the Fair Work Commission

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) provides an opportunity for workers and employers to take their grievances beyond the level of the workplace. The FWC considers an array of work-related issues every day, delivering determinations on matters such as bullying, employment award issues and unfair dismissal claims. Unlike courts, tribunal-type bodies such as the FWC are built to deliver fair, fast and accessible justice.

Yet it is important to remember that all matters will be dealt with in a robust and objective manner according to law. In keeping with the rule of evidence, the FWC will examine final workplace reports closely to determine if sound analysis and findings have been made; for this reason, a defensible final report is essential.

Obtaining professional guidance 

Getting the process of an investigation right from start to finish is critical for the effective and lasting resolution of workplace grievances.

With over 25 years' experience in investigating and managing misconduct, WISE has put together a toolkit with 20 high quality templates and an investigation guide for even the most inexperienced manager to follow.

Signed Statements vs Affidavits in Workplace Investigations

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, March 06, 2019

When conducting a workplace investigation, it is important that supporting evidence is collected in order to ensure that any decisions can be backed up, particularly in the event of legal proceedings.

We examine the merits of recording evidence in a signed statement versus an affidavit.

WHAt is a signed statement?  

The nature of a signed statement is fairly self-explanatory: this is a document where somebody records information they wish to present.

Unlike an affidavit, it does not necessarily need to be witnessed. If a witness is required, any adult can sign.

Statements are much less rigid documents than affidavits. As such, there are no requirements around the content or the format and the rules of evidence do not apply.

What is an affidavit?

In contrast, an affidavit is a legally recognised document which is considered to be 'sworn' evidence. If the deponent (the person providing the affidavit) does not wish to swear on a Bible or other religious text, an affidavit can be 'affirmed' in a secular fashion.

The signature on an affidavit must be witnessed, and that witness must be authorised to take affidavits. This is usually a qualified Justice of the Peace, or a solicitor or barrister.

Affidavits should only contain statements of fact rather than opinion, and information which the deponent is able to confirm of their own knowledge. For example, a deponent cannot say "I know that Billy swore at Jessica because Cynthia told me".  

The value of statement evidence vs affidavit evidence

Generally, a court or tribunal will make an order or direction as to whether a written statement is sufficient or affidavit evidence is required.

A written statement is usually enough in less serious circumstances. Written statements provide a helpful guide for a court or tribunal to determine what has occurred. But they are informative rather than being considered reliable evidence. This is because there are effectively no penalties for dishonesty in a written statement. If the statement is signed, however, you can challenge the credibility of the witness who gives evidence inconsistent with the contents of their signed statement. 

In contrast, an affidavit is a written version of verbal evidence. This means that providing false evidence in an affidavit is to all intent and purposes lying under oath, which could result in perjury charges being laid.

Should professional assistance be enlisted?

Writing affidavits can be a complicated process, and there is a risk that a court will refuse to allow some or all of the evidence contained in  an incorrectly drafted one. As noted, the consequences of giving false evidence in an affidavit are potentially very serious, and it is essential that anybody who has been asked to provide affidavit evidence is fully aware of the ramifications.

While there are resources that can help in drafting affidavits, professional assistance may be required, particularly if the investigation could potentially result in litigation or police intervention.

At WISE, our experienced team can assist you in conducting an unbiased and rigorous workplace investigation, including advising on whether witness statements will be sufficient or affidavit evidence will likely be required.

What To Do When Faced With Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, August 22, 2018

In the event of an allegation of child sexual abuse in the workplace, it is essential that immediate steps are taken to ensure the safety of any child allegedly involved. 

Following from this crucial first response, mandatory reports need to be made to the relevant statutory child protection authorities and subject to any police investigation, the allegations must be objectively investigated. The investigation report must be provided to the appropriate authority. 

As a society, we are beginning to understand the true nature and extent of child sexual abuse, including the insidious manner in which this crime can take place. Employers must be swift to report where required, providing all necessary support to various parties throughout the course of the investigative process. 

If in doubt, reporting child abuse allegations to the Police is preferable to inaction.

preying on vulnerability

Child sexual abuse by its very nature is a violation of trust, relying as it does upon the vulnerability of minors. As well as involving criminal physical and sexual acts, emotional abuse 'grooming' and 'crossing boundaries' are now recognised as being part of the matrix of child sexual abuse. 

For example, in an educational setting or community group, crossing boundaries and grooming can involve subtle favouritism from the employee towards one or more children. This can develop into a falsely 'special' connection that can ultimately lead to more tangible forms of abuse. 

For employers, protection against child sexual abuse by employers will require knowing the warning signs of inappropriate relationships and acting swiftly where needed.

Employers' responsibility to report

If an allegation of child sexual abuse arises in the workplace, the first priority for the employer is to secure the safety and welfare of the child/ren allegedly involved. This holds true even if the allegation is speculative or based upon unverified reports. 

Some employers will have mandatory reporting requirements dictated by legislation, which will require the reporting of any activity causing or likely to cause harm to a child as soon as is reasonably practicable in the circumstances. 

Above all, employers who become aware of possible child sexual abuse in the workplace must not delay reporting until a finding has been made. A report needs to be made as soon as the employer becomes aware of the allegation. 

Further, while strong policies around the reporting of child sexual abuse will guide timely and appropriate action, a failure to act cannot be blamed upon the lack of such resources.

Across australia - reporting child sexual abuse

As a nation - and particularly since Australians have become more aware of our institutional failures - we have learned to better protect and support children who are subject to child sexual abuse. 

If an allegation of child sexual abuse arises in connection with employment, there will be subtle differences between the Australian States and Territories regarding the form that a report should take. 

A summary report by the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) demonstrates that while there are some differences in the size and quantity of State and Territory legislation protecting children, the overall structure is similar - a Child Protection (or similarly named) Act, plus in many cases statutory reporting requirements to a statutory child protection department and/or Ombudsman, or similar body. 

Regardless of which jurisdiction an employer operates in, it is important to remember that procedural fairness must be provided throughout the entire process from allegation through to investigation and reporting. 

internal or external investigation? 

An allegation of child sexual abuse in the workplace will ordinarily be followed by practical steps to ensure the immediate safety and welfare of the child involved. 

Following this, the person or persons alleged to have carried out the abuse need to be informed of the allegation and advised of the next steps to be taken. 

Depending upon the severity of the alleged conduct, a period of immediate leave might be provided. It is vital to ensure that the person accused is given all necessary information about the process. This will include giving an initial outline of the allegation, the nature of reporting requirements and the type of investigation to be undertaken. 

Whether an investigation should be carried out internally or externally is a vital question for employers to consider. In such sensitive cases as child sexual abuse allegations, an internal investigator would need to be knowledgeable and experienced in all facets of objective and fair workplace investigations, be familiar with Child Protection Legislation and be experienced at interviewing children. If a workplace exhibits turmoil and division regarding the allegation, or expertise is simply not available in-house, then it might be best to source external assistance in conducting the investigation. 

When allegations of abuse arise the primary focus must be the safety, welfare and wellbeing of any child who may have been involved in the alleged conduct - or who may be at risk of harm due to contact with that employee. 

If you work with children and want to ensure your practices are current, WISE provides training services, including investigating abuse in care. Alternatively, if you have an allegation of abuse, and are unsure what to do, contact WISE today! 

Analysing Evidence: The Key Step of Workplace Investigations

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, August 15, 2018

One of the most challenging and important tasks undertaken by a workplace investigator is the analysis of the evidence that has been gathered during the course of the investigation. 

Key questions to consider include: What evidence should be contained in the investigation report? How do I analyse what I have gathered? How does this connect with the findings I make in the investigation report? 

Here's how to effectively and transparently analyse the evidence.

WHAT evidence should be included? 

There is a simple answer to this question: ALL relevant evidence collected in the course of the workplace investigation will need to form part of the analysis, the findings and the final report. The act of leaving evidence out without explanation can - intentionally or otherwise - indicate a lack of thoroughness or even worse a prejudgement about a fact in issue. A piece of evidence might ultimately prove to be of little consequence, but this should be at least acknowledged and noted. So if in doubt don't leave it out. 

Exculpatory and inculpatory evidence

One way to begin marshalling material is to consider if the evidence is exculpatory or inculpatory. If we think of the allegation in question - let's say sexual harassment in the workplace - we can begin to analyse the evidence in terms of those items that most likely indicate that the conduct occurred, and those that point to the opposite conclusion. 

Evidence that indicates or tends to indicate that something occurred is known as inculpatory evidence. Conversely if evidence vindicates or tends to clear the alleged harasser of the wrongdoing, then this is known as exculpatory evidence. 

It is unlikely that you will have two neat piles from the start! However, this formal approach to organising the evidence can assist in creating a logical report that withstands future scrutiny. 

Analysis of the evidence

For each piece of evidence examined, investigators need to determine how strong or weak it is in the overall context of the investigation. Strong evidence will be consistent, reliable and in terms of witness statements, believable, probable and credible. 

Considering that a workplace investigation often reflects strong emotions and internal allegiances within the organisation, it is important to make an objective assessment of the reliability of statements made and items presented. Investigators will be on the lookout for statements that might be self-serving, or made a long time after the event in questions, for example.

Other factors to consider will be internal anomalies in statements or possible collusion between witnesses. An element of triangulation of the data will be required - the investigator is looking to detect where dubious connections indicate a weakness in evidence, or conversely where consistent evidence is noticeable across a number of different sources, including documentary evidence. 

It is important to compare and contrast evidence from different sources: Which parts of the evidence consistently support the view that the events in question occurred and which indicate that it did not occur. Once this is done, the weight or value of each part of the evidence can be assessed.    

writing up the analysis

Those new to workplace investigations can sometimes become daunted by the task of reporting on findings made. It is important to be clear about the methodology, about the manner in which the evidence was handled and how you have arrived at your findings. 

Take a methodical approach, which will assist your own thinking as well as allow any reader a logical progression through the document. Some organisations will require the report to be set out in a particular manner and it is important to ascertain if this is the case. 

Above all - make your findings clear. If your finding is that an event occurred, then state this clearly. It will be necessary to explain why you consider certain claims to be substantiated or where there is insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion on a contended point. This document could well be used in a number of forums including court and tribunal proceedings. It should be a reflection of the fact that the workplace investigation was fair, that all relevant evidence was considered and included, and that findings are based upon well-balanced evidentiary analysis. 

A workplace investigation is a systematic process for establishing facts and circumstances surrounding a complaint or allegation. If you need assistance with conducting an investigation, or would like support in analysing your evidence gathered, WISE provides both supported and full investigation services.

Common Issues with Workplace Mediations

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, August 08, 2018

Occasional conflicts and disputes are a fact of life in all workplaces. One of the best ways to defuse difficult situations, resolve office concerns and keep your staff happy is mediation. But even though this is a potentially very effective device in the employer's toolkit, workplace mediations can go wrong.

Let's take a look at the process of mediation, and some of the issues which might arise. 

What is mediation? 

The mediation process requires all parties involved in a dispute or issue to meet in the presence of a third party (the mediator), to try and come up with mutually acceptable solutions.

The mediator is trained and is required to be neutral. Unlike a judge, they will not make a determination or decision - instead, a mediator will listen to all parties and suggest objective solutions and options. 

what happens during mediation?

During the actual process of mediation, the parties are encouraged to ventilate their respective viewpoints. Each party then has the opportunity to have private discussions with the mediator, after which the mediator will discuss any commonalities and the key differences in each party's attitude, while suggesting potential resolutions.

Outcomes are flexible and are really only limited by the willingness of the involved parties to cooperate. In the employment context, this means that mediations may result in agreement to apologise, or more novel outcomes such as crediting or debiting leave hours, returning property, or providing work references. Mediations are confidential, which also makes them an extremely attractive option. 

key issues with mediation

Mediation can be extremely helpful by providing a positive communication and solution tool in circumstances where there are no easy answers.

However, mediation may not be as successful if one or both of the parties are extremely entrenched in their viewpoint and are unlikely or unwilling to compromise. This is particularly the case because mediation is a voluntary process - so if staff are reluctant to participate, they cannot be forced to engage.

Further, where matters of serious misconduct or illegality are involved, it may be inappropriate to attempt to find novel solutions to workplace issues. In those circumstances, it is generally appropriate to follow the traditional paths of discipline, incentivisation or other resolution methods.

There can also be issues if parties don't comply with any agreed upon outcomes of the mediation process. 

potential for problems after mediation

Any agreement which is reached during the mediation process can be as formal or as informal as the parties and workplace prefer: from a simple verbal agreement all the way through to a Deed of Settlement recording the negotiated terms or contract stipulating future actions.

Should a formal agreement be executed and one of the parties subsequently reneges on the terms of settlement, the aggrieved party can pursue legal action through the court system to force compliance.

If you have an issue in your workplace regarding employee conflict, it may be useful to discuss these issues with an external, experienced workplace investigator or mediator. If you need support in how to conduct an investigation or need to engage a mediator, contact WISE.

Why Employers Can't Afford to Ignore Procedural Fairness

Vince Scopelliti - Wednesday, August 01, 2018

It is important for employers to keep procedural fairness top of mind when conducting workplace investigations or taking disciplinary action.

Failing to do so can result in terminations being deemed unfair, as the recent Fair Work Commission decision of Nicholas Jarmain v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd [2018] FWC 3255 (14 June 2018) shows. 

background of the case 

Linfox Armaguard dismissed casual employee Nicholas Jarmain in October 2017 for serious misconduct. While the Fair Work Commission found the termination was justified, it determined that Mr Jarmain had been unfairly dismissed due to insufficient procedural fairness.

Mr Jarmain was dismissed after a client complained that he was "overly engaged in interaction and discussion" and generally inappropriate with staff members and customers of the client.

In response to the allegations, Mr Jarmain was asked to undergo an interview with a security officer and a union support person present. Explanations for his behaviour were sought (and his answers recorded) during the interview, and Mr Jarmain was then suspended from duty.

At a meeting three weeks later, Mr Jarmain was given further opportunity to explain the circumstances giving rise to the complaints against him. However, as his preferred union delegate was injured and unable to attend, the employer substituted their own preferred union official for that meeting.

The employer terminated Mr Jarmain's casual employment the next day, citing wilful and deliberate breaches of safety and security procedures. 

Breaches of procedural fairness

In the interest of procedural fairness, Mr Jarmain's employer should have advised him what claims were being investigated before asking him to participate in a recorded interview.

This was considered to be particularly egregious given that the employer is a big company with sufficient access to HR professionals. HR could (and indeed should) have been relied upon to ensure that Mr Jarmain was afforded procedural fairness when facing disciplinary action.

While the employer's reasons for dismissing Mr Jarmain were "sound, defensible and well-founded", especially given the job involves loaded weapons, the Commission concluded that the flaws in procedure, such as failing to provide any formal warnings or reprimands, were significant. 

The Commission determined that Mr Jarmain had not been given sufficient notification of the circumstances surrounding the complaints against him, or indeed the events giving rise to the complaints - and that he had effectively been ambushed, without sufficient information to defend himself against the claims. 

This meant that both Mr Jarmain's interview and ultimate dismissal were contrary to the requirements of procedural fairness.

Additional failures included the employer selecting the support person assisting Mr Jarmain in the second interview (as opposed to permitting the employee to pick his support person). By making such a decision it was akin to removing Mr Jarmain's right to have a support person present at all.

Further, the employer should not have suspended Mr Jarmain without pay.

the final decision

Ultimately, given the nature of the industry in which Mr Jarmain was employed, Commissioner Cambridge declined to order reinstatement of the employment but ordered compensation payments to the tune of $8,592.

This case demonstrates that having a valid reason to dismiss is only one factor that is considered in unfair dismissal claims. The Commission will not hesitate to award judgments in favour of the applicant where the employment was terminated in a manner that is not procedurally fair.

If you would like to ensure your investigation process is fair, WISE provides full and supported investigation services, as well as training.