AN v ANZ BankingGroup Limited

[2015] AusHRC 93

© Australian Human Rights Commission 2015.

ISSN 1837-1183

The Australian Human Rights Commission encourages the dissemination and exchange of information presented in this publication.

All material presented in this publication is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence, with the exception of the Australian Human Rights Commission Logo.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/3.0/au.

In essence, you are free to copy, communicate and adapt the work, as long as you attribute the work to the Australian Human Rights Commission and abide by the other licence terms.

Design and layout Dancingirl Designs

Printing Masterprint Pty Limited

Electronic format

This publication can be found in electronic format on the website of the Australian Human Rights Commission: www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/index.html.

Contact details

For further information about the Australian Human Rights Commission, please visit www.humanrights.gov.au or email communications@humanrights.gov.au. You can also write to:

Communications Team Australian Human Rights Commission GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited

Report into discrimination in employment based on criminal record

[2015] AusHRC 93

Australian Human Rights Commission 2015

iv

1 Introduction to this inquiry 3

2 Summaryoffindingsandrecommendations 3

3 Background 3

4 Facts 4

5 Relevantlegalframework 6

6 Consideration 76.1 Isthereanactorpractice? 76.2 Doestheactinvolveadistinction,exclusionorpreference

onthe basisofcriminalrecord? 76.3 Didthatexclusionhavetheeffectofnullifyingorimpairing

equalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentor occupation? 9

6.4 Wastheexclusionbasedontheinherentrequirementsof thePosition? 9

7 Recommendations 127.1 MrAN’ssubmissions 127.2 ANZ’spoliciesandtraining 137.3 Apology 14

8 ResponsetoRecommendations 15

Contents

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 1

Australian Human Rights Commission

Level3,175PittStreet,SydneyNSW2000 GPOBox5218,SydneyNSW2001Telephone:0292849600 Facsimile:0292849611 Website: www.humanrights.gov.au

March2015

SenatortheHon.GeorgeBrandisQC Attorney-General ParliamentHouse CanberraACT2600

DearAttorney,

Ihavecompletedmyreportpursuanttosection31(b)(ii)oftheAustralian Human Rights Commission Act 1986(Cth)intothecomplaintmadebyMrANagainstANZBankingGroupLimited(ANZ).

IhavefoundthatANZ’sactofrefusingtoengageMrANasanInformationTechnologyProjectManagerconstitutedanexclusionmadeonthebasisofcriminalrecord.ThishadtheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingMrAN’sequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation.Thisexclusionwasnotbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob.

Inlightofmyfindings,IrecommendedthatANZfurtherdevelopitspoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecordandconducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.IalsorecommendedthatANZapologisetoMrAN.

ANZprovidedaresponsetomyfindingsandrecommendationson21January2015.Inparticular,ANZsaidthatitwillconductrefreshertrainingwithrelevantrecruitmentdecisionmakers,andthatitnowplacesagreateremphasisontheageofacriminalconvictionindeterminingwhetheranemployeeorcontractorcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularrole.IhavesetoutANZ’sresponsetomyrecommendationsatPart8ofmyreport.

Iencloseacopyofmyreport.

Yourssincerely,

GillianTriggsPresidentAustralianHumanRightsCommission

2

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 3

1 Introduction to this inquiry1. ThisreportsetsouttheAustralianHumanRightsCommission’sfindingsfollowinganinquiryinto

acomplaintofdiscriminationinemploymentoroccupationonthebasisofcriminalrecord.ThecomplaintwasmadebyMrANagainstANZBankingGroupLimited(ANZ).TheCommissionissueda preliminaryviewtothepartieson25August2014.

2. Thisinquiryhasbeenundertakenpursuanttos 31(b)oftheAustralian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)(AHRCAct).MrANhasaskedthathenotbereferredtobynameinthisreport.IconsiderthatthepreservationoftheanonymityofMrANisnecessarytoprotecthisprivacy.Accordingly,Ihavegivenadirectionpursuanttos14(2)oftheAHRCActandhavereferredtohimthroughoutasMrAN.

2 Summary of findings and recommendations3. Asaresultofthisinquiry,IhavefoundthatMrANwasdiscriminatedagainstbyANZonthe

basisofhiscriminalrecord.

4. Inlightofmyfindings,IrecommendthatANZ:

• furtherdevelopitspoliciesinrelationtothepreventionofdiscriminationinemploymentonthe basisofcriminalrecord;

• conducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob;and

• provideaformalwrittenapologytoMrAN.

3 Background5. MrANmadeawrittencomplainttotheCommissionon26July2013.HeallegesthatANZ

refusedto engagehimasanInformationTechnologyProjectManagerbecauseofhiscriminalrecord.

6. On1October2013,ANZprovidedaresponsetothecomplaint,alongwithcopiesof:

• ANZ’sBackgroundChecksPolicy;• ANZ’sProcessforEngagingaNon-Employee;• MrAN’scompletedPre-EmploymentCheckRequestForm,includinghisConfidentialityUndertakingandConsentForm;

• ANZ’sCodeofConduct&Ethics;and• the‘RoleMandate’documentinrelationtotheCX[CustomerExperience]ProjectManagerposition(Position)forwhichMrANhadapplied.

7. Duringthecourseofthisinquiry,ANZalsoprovidedits‘BackgroundCheckGuidelines’anda‘PoliceCheckDecisionOutcomeForm’,inrelationtothedecisionnottoproceedwithMrAN’sengagement.

8. AnattemptwasmadetoconciliatethecomplaintduringthecourseofNovember2013toApril2014.However,thepartieswereunabletoreachagreementonresolvingthecomplaint.

4

4 Facts9. Basedontheinformationprovidedbytheparties,therelevantfactsareasfollows:

a) Onorabout25May2013,RobertWalters,arecruitmentandlabourhirecompany,wasinstructedbyANZtosourcecandidatestobeinterviewedbyANZforthePosition.

b) Shortlythereafter,MsNadiaSaid,arecruitmentconsultantwithRobertWalters,invited MrANtoapplyforthePosition.

c) Onorabout6June2013,ANZinterviewedMrANinrelationtothePosition.

d) On11July2013,MrANreceivedanemailfromMsSaidwhichstatedthathehadbeenselectedbyANZforthePositionwithastartdateof5August2013,foratwelvemonthcontract.TheemailincludedaRobertWaltersIncorporatedContractorsAgreement(ICA),whichstatedinitsintroduction:

RobertWaltershasmadeorproposestomakeanagreementwiththeClient[ANZ]fortheengagementofanindependentcontractorthathastheskillsandexpertiserequiredtoperformtheAssignment……

TheContractor[MrAN’scompany]agreeswithRobertWaltersthattheContractorwillsupplyitsemployees,whowillapplytheirskillsandexpertiseinrelationtotheAssignmentonthetermsandconditionssetoutinthisAgreement.

e) Laterthatday,MrANattendedRobertWalters’officetofilloutandsigntheRobertWaltersICA;ANZ’sPre-EmploymentCheckRequestForm;aConfidentialityUndertakingandConsentForm;aFederalPoliceRecordCheckconsentformandonlinedocumentationfromFirstAdvantage,athirdpartyengagedbyANZtoconductcriminalrecordchecks.WhensigningtheConfidentialityUndertakingandConsentForm,MrANwarrantedthathehadnotbeenconvictedofacriminaloffenceanywhereintheworldandacknowledgedthatANZmayobtainapoliceclearancechecktovalidatethis.

f) On16July2013,FirstAdvantagenotifiedMsSaidthattheCriminalRecordCheckforMr ANdisclosedapriorconviction.ItforwardedtoheraNationalPoliceCertificatewhichindicatedthaton2January1979MrANwasconvictedof‘ArmedRobberywithViolenceWhilstinCompany’andsentencedto5years’imprisonment,witharecommendationforparoleafterserving12months.

g) On16July2013,MrANstatesthatMsSaidtelephonedhimtoseekhisinputandexplanationinrelationtotheoffence.Duringthisconversation,MrANstatesthathe:

• provideddetailsoftheconvictionandcircumstancesaroundit;

• explainedthathehadgrownupinaroughneighbourhoodinBrisbaneandhadfalleninwiththewrongcrowd;

• statedthathehadnotre-offended;and

• reiteratedhisrelevantemploymenthistoryandcommunityvolunteerwork.

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 5

MrANstatesthatMsSaidstatedthat:

• shewouldconveyMrAN’sfeedbacktoANZ;and

• shewasoftheopinionthatastheoffencewasnotcommittedagainstaninstitution,andwasnotofthenatureoffraud/embezzlement,itshouldnotaffecthisengagementbyANZ.

h) Onorabout16July2013,ANZ’sContractManagementOfficereceivedacopyoftheresultsofMrAN’sCriminalRecordCheckfromFirstAdvantage.

i) On17July2013,MrCallumFry,SeniorConsultantofRobertWalters,statedthathepassedMrAN’sexplanationontoMsSharonO’Donnell,aProjectDirectorofANZ.MrANstatesthaton17July2013,MsSaidtelephonedhimandtoldhimthatRobertWaltershaddiscussedthematterwithMsO’Donnellwhostatedthat:

• shewasnotparticularlyconcernedabouttheoffence,givenhowlongagoitoccurred;

• shewouldneverthelessneedtoseekclearanceforMrAN’srecruitmentfromANZ’sHRdepartment.

j) RobertWaltersstatesthaton19July2013,MsO’DonnellinformedRobertWaltersthat‘herhandsweretied’andthatANZcouldnotrecruitMrANduetothenatureofhiscriminaloffence.MsSaidsubsequentlytelephonedMrANandconveyedthisdecisiontohim.ShealsoemailedMrANthatday.Theemailstated:

ToconfirmANZhaswithdrawnthepositionofCXProjectManagerduetoanunsatisfactorypolicecheckasANZdoissuetheirrolesdependingonpolicechecksastypicalwithintheFinancialServicesspace.

AlsotoconfirmasrequestedIhaveescalatedthistoourHRteamandamwaitingforfurtherdirectiononthematter…

k) Laterthatday,MrANemailedMsSaidandreiteratedthesubstanceoftheirearlierconversation.Hestatedintheemailthat:

• hisconvictiondoesnotimpactonhisabilitytofulfiltheinherentrequirementsof the job;

• bywithdrawingthejoboffer,ANZwasdiscriminatingagainsthimonthebasisof his criminalrecord;

• herequestsRobertWaltersaskANZtoreconsideritsdecision.

l) On24July2013,MrANsentanemailtoMsSaid,andrequestedthatitbepassedontotheHRDirectorofRobertWalters.Intheemail,hesetoutdetailsofthesubmissionshepreviouslymadetoMsSaidinrelationtohisoffenceandhisabilitytoperformthePosition.Healsostated:

ANZdidnotrequestmetoprovidefurtherdetailsofmyrecordorthecircumstancesaroundit.WhilstIunderstandNadia[Said]verballybriefedarepresentativeoftheANZHiringManager,IhavenoideawhatinformationwasactuallyprovidedtoANZinrelationtothis.IhavehadnocontactwithanyoneatANZ,nortomyknowledgehasANZrequestedanyfurtherinformationfromme.

6

4 Facts

…

ByrefusingtoemploymeANZhasdiscriminatedagainstmeonthebasisofmycriminalrecord.Iconsiderthisgrosslyunfair,andplantomakeaformalcomplainttotheAustralianHumanRightsCommission.

m) RobertWaltersstatesthatonreceiptofthe24July2013email,MsSaidpasseditontoActingHRManagerofRobertWalters,MsDanicaBurns.On26July2013,MsBurns,Ms SaidandMrLukeGuanlao,SeniorLegalCounselofRobertWalters,attendedatelephoneconferencewithMsO’DonnellofANZ.RobertWaltersstatesthatduringthiscall,Ms O’DonnelladvisedthattheGroupInvestigationsteamofANZhadreviewedthematterandmadethedecisionnottoproceedwiththeoffer.

n) MrANwasnotaffordedanopportunitytodiscussthismatterdirectlywithANZ.However,on25July2013MrANcontactedviaemail,throughtheLinkedInprofessionalnetworkingtool,MrDanielSammarco,anANZProgramDirectorwithwhomheinterviewedforthePosition.In hisemail,hereferredto:

• hisdisappointmentthatnoonefromANZhadcontactedhimregardingthematter,despiteprovidingcomprehensiveinformationtoRobertWaltersandaskingthemtoprovidethistoANZtoreconsideritsdecision;

• howlongagotheoffencetookplace;

• hisrelevantworkexperienceforthePosition;

• hismembershipoftheAustralianInstituteofProjectManagementandotherprofessionalbodies;

• histertiaryqualifications;

• hisvolunteeringworkasafirefighter;and

• beingahusband,fatherandstepfather.

o) Laterthatday,MrSammarcorespondedtoMrAN’s25July2013email.Hestated:It’smostlikelythatnoonehascontactedyou[as]Ihavebeenoverseasfortwoweeks…so apologiesforthat.

It’sunfortunatethishadoccurredhoweveranz’shrpolicyisquitestringentinthesemattersandInorSharonwhoisactinginmyabsencehasdiscretiontocounterthis.

5 Relevant legal framework10. PartII,Division4oftheAHRCAct,whichiscomprisedofsections30–35,isconcernedwith

theCommission’sfunctionsrelatingtoequalopportunityinemployment.

11. Section31(b)confersontheCommissionafunctionofinquiringintoanyactorpracticethatmayconstitutediscrimination.Section32(1)(b)requirestheCommissiontoexercisethisfunctionwhenacomplaintismadetoitinwritingallegingthatanactorpracticeconstitutesdiscrimination.Section8(6)oftheAHRCActrequiresthatthefunctionoftheCommissionundersection31(b)beperformedbythePresident.

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 7

12. Section3(1)oftheAHRCActdefinesdiscriminationforthepurposesofsection 31(b)as:

(a)anydistinction,exclusionorpreferencemadeonthebasisofrace,colour,sex,religion,politicalopinion,nationalextractionorsocialoriginthathastheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and

(b) anyotherdistinction,exclusionorpreferencethat:

(i) hastheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and

(ii) hasbeendeclaredbytheregulationstoconstitutediscriminationforthepurposesofthisAct;

butdoesnotincludeanydistinction,exclusionorpreference:

(c) inrespectofaparticularjobbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob;or

(d) inconnectionwithemploymentasamemberofthestaffofaninstitutionthatisconductedinaccordancewiththedoctrines,tenets,beliefsorteachingsofaparticularreligionorcreed,beingadistinction,exclusionorpreferencemadeingoodfaithinordertoavoidinjurytothereligioussusceptibilitiesofadherentsofthatreligionorthatcreed.

13. AustraliahasdeclaredcriminalrecordasagroundofdiscriminationforthepurposesoftheAHRCAct.1

6 Consideration14. Indecidingwhethertherehasbeendiscriminationwithinthetermsofs 31(b)oftheAHRCAct,

I amrequiredtoconsiderthefollowingquestions:

• whethertherewasanactorpracticewithinthemeaningofs 30(1)oftheAHRCAct;

• whetherthatactorpracticeinvolvedadistinction,exclusionorpreferencethatwasmadeon thebasisofthecomplainant’scriminalrecord;

• whetherthatdistinction,exclusionorpreferencehadtheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatmentinemploymentoroccupation;and

• whetherthatdistinction,exclusion,orpreferencewasbasedontheinherentrequirementsof thejob.

6.1 Is there an act or practice?15. ‘Act’and‘practice’aredefinedats 30(1)oftheAHRCAct.‘Act’and‘practice’havetheir

ordinarymeanings.Anactisathingdoneandapracticeisacourseofrepeatedconduct.

16. Onorabout19July2013,ANZdecidednottoengageMrANinthePosition.Iamsatisfiedthatthiswasan‘act’withinthemeaningofs30(1)oftheAHRCAct.

8

6 Consideration

6.2 Does the act involve a distinction, exclusion or preference on the basis of criminal record?

17. IalsoconsiderthatANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrANconstitutesan‘exclusion’withinthescopeofthedefinitionof‘discrimination’intheAHRCAct.MrANsubmitsthatthereasonforANZ’sdecisionwashiscriminalrecord.

18. ForacaseofdiscriminationtobefoundregardingANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrAN,itwouldneedtobeshownthattherelevantexclusionwasmade‘onthebasis’ofhiscriminalrecord.Inconsideringtheexpression‘basedon’,inasimilardefinitionofdiscriminationundersection9(1)oftheRacial Discrimination Act 1975(Cth),theFederalCourtheldthatthewordsweretobeequatedwiththephrase‘byreferenceto’,ratherthanthemorelimited‘byreasonof’or‘onthegroundof’whichhavebeeninterpretedelsewheretorequiresomesortofcausalconnection.2Itdoesnotneedtobethesolereason.

19. ThereisnodisputebetweenthepartiesthatMrAN’scriminalrecordwasareasonforANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrAN.Initssubmissions,ANZhasstatedthatit:

decidednottoproceedwith[MrAN’s]placementatANZtoperformthatrolebecauseitdeterminedthathewouldnotbeabletoperformtheinherentrequirementsoftheroleasa resultofhisconvictionfortheArmedRobberyoffence.

20. ItisclearfromthisstatementthatMrAN’scriminalrecordwasareasonfortheexclusion.

21. ItappearsfromANZ’ssubmissionsthatthedecisionnottoengageMrANmaynothavebeenentirelybasedonhiscriminalrecord,butalsoattributedtoanothertwofactors.

22. First,whensigningtheConfidentialityUndertakingandConsentForm,MrANwarrantedthathehadnotbeenconvictedofacriminaloffenceanywhereintheworld.GiventhatMrANhasacriminalrecord,ANZsubmitsthathehadprovidedafalsewarranty.InANZ’sview,thisconductisinconsistentwithitsCodeofConduct&EthicsandtherequirementthatinthePositionthepersonresponsiblewill‘buildanenvironmentofopennessandtrustwithANZstaffandstakeholders’.MrANsubmitsthatthereasonhedidnotdisclosehiscriminalrecordtoANZwasbecauseofinformationhehadaccessedfromtheQueenslandGovernmentat:https://www.qld.gov.au/law/crime-and-police/criminal-records-and-history-checks/criminal-records/.Thiswebpagestatesthat:

Youcansayyouhavenoconvictionsifyoumeetthefollowingcriteria:

• youwerenotimprisonedaspartofyoursentenceoryouwereimprisonedforlessthan30months;

• enoughtimehaspassed(seebelow);• youhaven’tbrokenthelawsinceyourconviction.

ForQueenslandoffences,thetimethathastopassbeforeyoudon’thavetomentiona convictionis:

• 10yearsifyouwereconvictedintheSupremeCourtorDistrictCourtasanadult;• 5yearsforothercases,unlessyouwereorderedtopayrestitution,andthenuntilyou havepaid.

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 9

23. Although,asANZsubmits,MrANwasultimatelyincorrectinhisconclusionthathisconvictionwasspent,3hissubmissionprovidesanexplanationastowhyhesignedthewarrantythathehadnotbeenconvictedofacriminaloffence.MrANformedtheviewthathisconvictionwasspentonthebasisthatheserved13monthsofhisfiveyearsentence,hisconvictionoccurredmorethan34yearsagoandhehadnofurtherconvictions.

24. Second,ANZsubmitsthatsincemakingthecomplaint,MrANprovidedconflictinginformationaboutthereasonhedidnotdisclosehiscriminalrecord.ANZsubmitsthatthisalsoraisesquestionsabouthisintegrityandhonesty.

25. Asstatedabove,thereisnodisputebetweenthepartiesthatMrAN’scriminalrecordwasareasonfortheexclusion.Itdoesnotneedtobethesolereason.Interpretingthephrase‘onthebasisof’inthebroadersense,tomean‘byreferenceto’,IamsatisfiedthatANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrANconstitutedanexclusiononthebasisofMrAN’scriminalrecord.

6.3 Did that exclusion have the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation?

26. TheAHRCActwasintroducedtobethevehiclebywhichAustralia’sobligationsundertheDiscrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention 1958(ILO111Convention)wereimplemented.4Forthisreason,itisappropriatetoconstruethedefinitionof‘discrimination’ins3(1)oftheAHRCActinaccordancewiththeconstructiongivenininternationallawtoArticle1oftheILO111Convention.5

27. Article1(3)oftheILO111Conventionprovidesthat‘employment’and‘occupation’includesaccesstoemploymentandtoparticularoccupations,andtermsandconditionsofemployment.Further,thebackgroundmaterialstotheILO111ConventionrevealthattheConventionwasintendedtoprotectallworkers,inallfields,includingself-employedworkersinboththepublicandprivatesector.6

28. Iamsatisfiedthat:

• thereferencetoemploymentandoccupationinsection3(1)oftheAHRCActisnotlimitedtothetraditionalemploymentrelationshipofemployerandemployee;and

• theILO111Conventionandsection3(1)oftheAHRCActwasintendedtoprotectallworkersincludingindependentcontractorsandself-employedworkers.

29. HadMrAN’scompany(Company),beenengagedasanindependentcontractorbyRobertWalterstoprovidetheskillsandexpertiserequiredbyANZ,MrANwouldhaveundertakentheworkrequiredbyANZinthePosition.HewouldhavehadtheopportunitytoearnanincomeasanemployeeoftheCompanyand/orasashareholderoftheCompany.Hewasnotgiventheopportunitytodosoonthebasisofhiscriminalrecord.Inthecircumstances,IfindthatthedecisionnottoengageMrANinthePositionhadtheeffectofnullifyingorimpairinghisequalityofopportunityortreatment,inemploymentoroccupation,withinthemeaningofsection3(1)oftheAHRCAct.

10

6.4 Was the exclusion based on the inherent requirements of the Position?30. Paragraph(c)ofthedefinitionof‘discrimination’insection3(1)oftheAHRCActprovides

thatdiscrimination‘doesnotincludeanydistinction,exclusionorpreference,inrespectofaparticularjob,thatisbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob’.GivenmyfindingthatANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrANinthePositionwasanexclusiononthebasisofcriminalrecord,Imustconsiderwhethertheexclusionwasbasedontheinherentrequirementsofthejob.

31. Paragraph(c)isan‘exception’totheprohibitionagainstdiscrimination.Itshouldthereforebeinterpretedstrictly,soasnottoresultinunduelimitationoftheprotectionconferredbythelegislation.7

32. ANZsubmitsthatitsdecisionnottoengageMrANinthePositionwasbasedonitsassessmentthatMrAN’sconvictionforthearmedrobberyoffencemeantthathewasunabletoperformtheinherentrequirementsoftherole.ANZmadethefollowingsubmissions:

• Thearmedrobberyoffencewasaveryseriousoffence;itinvolvedtheft,occurredincircumstanceswheretheassailantswerearmedandwhere‘itisclearfromthenatureoftheoffencethatviolencewasinvolved’.ItresultedintheCourtimposingasentenceof5 years’imprisonment.

• MrAN’sconvictionforsuchaseriousoffencedemonstratesafailuretoactwithintegrityandhonestyand,asaresult:

» ANZisnot‘reasonablyabletohavesufficienttrustandconfidenceinhimtoallowhimtoworkwithintheorganisation…ortohaveaccesstoANZ’sITsystemswithlimitedsupervision’;and

» ANZconsiders‘thereisarisk[MrAN]maynotkeepthesensitivecommercialandsecurityinformationobtainedwhileperformingtheroleconfidential,ormaymisusesuchinformation’.

(a) Identifying the ‘inherent requirements’

33. Appropriateidentificationoftheinherentrequirementsofthejobisapre-conditiontoprovingthatthecomplainantisunabletoperformthoseinherentrequirements.

34. An‘inherentrequirement’issomethingthatis‘essentialtotheposition’8andnot‘peripheral’.9 It isan‘essentialfeature’or‘definingcharacteristic’.10

35. Further,theinherentrequirementsmustbeinrespectof‘aparticularjob’.Theterm‘a particularjob’in Article1(2)oftheILO111ConventionhasbeenconstruedbyreferencetothepreparatoryworkandthetextoftheConventiontomean‘aspecificanddefinablejob,functionortask’andits‘inherentrequirements’arethoserequiredbythecharacteristicsoftheparticularjob.11

6 Consideration

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 11

36. ANZstatesthattheITProjectManagerPositioninvolvedworkingonanewinternetbankingsystem.ItstatesthatthePositioninvolvedcoordinatingtheactivitiesofvariousgroups(e.g. designers,IT experts,marketingandbrandingprofessionals),managingexternalcontractualrelationshipsandensuringthenewinternetbankingsystemisdeliveredontimeand withinbudget.

37. TheRoleMandatedocumentpreparedbyANZforthePositionstatesthattheskills,knowledgeandexperiencerequiredincludedthe:

• abilitytoundertakeprojectmanagementwithinthedigitaldomain;

• abilitytomaketimelydecisionsinrapidlychangingandhighrisksituations;

• abilitytopresentinformationtogroupsofpeopleandmakeuseofavarietyoftoolsandtechniquestoconveyideas;

• abilitytopersuade,convince,influenceandimpressothersinordertogainsupportfor an agreementtoanideaorconcept;

• abilityto‘convey,explainandunderstand’informationinwrittenreports,clearlyandconcisely;and

• abilitytoeffectivelymanageowntimeandresources.

38. ANZhasstatedthatitconsiderstheinherentrequirementsofthePositiontobe:

• thatANZbeabletohavesufficienttrustandconfidenceinthePositionholdertoallowhimtoworkwithintheorganisation,havingregardtotherequirementsofANZ’sValuesandCodeofConduct&Ethics,andhavingregardtothegeneralexpectationsofANZ’scustomersandshareholders;

• thatthePositionholderaccessANZ’sITsystems(includingsensitivecommercialandsecurityinformation)withlimitedsupervision;

• thatthePositionholderkeepinformationobtainedinthecourseofperformingtherole(includinginformationregardingANZ’sITsystem,products,businessplans,projects,internetbankinginterfaceandsecurityrequirementsandexposures)confidential;and

• thatthePositionholdernotmisuseinformationgainedinthecourseofperformingtherole(includinginformationregardingANZ’sITsystem,products,businessplans,projects,internetbankinginterfaceandsecurityrequirementsandexposures).

39. IacceptthattheinherentrequirementsofthePositionarethosesetoutintheRoleMandatedocumentpreparedbyANZ.IacknowledgethatthePositioninvolvesaccesstosensitivecommercialandsecurityinformationwithlimitedsupervisionandacceptthatitwasaninherentrequirementtokeepinformationobtainedinthecourseoftheroleconfidentialandnottomisusetheinformation.I alsoacceptthattheinherentrequirementsincludetrustandconfidence,beingrequirementssetoutinANZ’sCodeofConduct&Ethics.

12

(b) Was the distinction, exclusion or preference ‘based on’ the identified inherent requirements of the job?

40. In Commonwealth v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and Others,12WilcoxJinterpretedthephrase‘basedon’asfollows:

Inthepresentcase,therearepolicyreasonsforrequiringatightcorrelationbetweentheinherentrequirementsofthejobandtherelevant‘distinction’,‘exclusion’or‘preference’.Otherwise,asMrO’Gormanpointedout,theobjectofthelegislationwouldreadilybedefeated.Amajorobjectiveofanti-discriminationlegislationistopreventpeoplebeingstereotyped;thatis,judgednotaccordingtotheirindividualmeritsbutbyreferencetoageneralorcommoncharacteristicofpeopleoftheirrace,gender,ageetc,asthecasemaybe.Ifthewords‘basedon’aresointerpretedthatitissufficienttofindalinkbetweentherestrictionandthestereotype,asdistinctfromtheindividual,thelegislationwillhavetheeffect ofperpetuatingtheveryprocessitwasdesignedtobringtoanend.13

41. TheFullCourtaffirmedthatapproachinCommonwealth v Bradley.14Inparticular,BlackCJdiscussedthephrase‘basedon’asfollows:

Respectforhumanrightsandtheidealofequality–includingequalityofopportunityinemployment–requiresthateverypersonbetreatedaccordingtohisorherindividualmeritandnotbyreferencetostereotypesascribedbyvirtueofmembershipofaparticulargroup,whetherthatgroupbeoneofgender,race,nationalityorage.Theseconsiderationsmustbereflectedinanyconstructionofthedefinitionof‘discrimination’presentlyunderconsiderationbecause,iftheyarenot,andaconstructionisadoptedthatenablestheascriptionofnegativestereotypesortheavoidanceofindividualassessment,theessentialobjectoftheActtopromoteequalityofopportunityinemploymentwillbefrustrated.15

42. TheChiefJusticethenheldthattheremustbemorethana‘logical’linkbetweentheinherentrequirementofthepositionandtheexclusionoftheapplicant.Rather,hisHonourheldthattheremustbea‘tight’or‘close’connection.

43. Assetoutabove,ANZsubmitsthatMrAN’sconvictionmeantthatheisunabletoperformtheinherentrequirementsoftherole.ANZdrawsattentiontotheseriousnessoftheoffenceandstatesthatthe‘offencedemonstratesafailuretoactwithintegrityandhonesty’.

44. ThereisnodoubtthattheoffencewhichMrANwasconvictedofwasaseriousoffence.However,theoffenceoccurredin1978,morethan35yearsago.ThisoffencewasMrAN’sonlyoffenceandhehashadnosubsequentconvictions.MrANwas21yearsoldatthetimeoftheoffence.Hehasprovidedsomecontextaroundtheoffencestatingthathehad‘falleninwiththewrongcrowd’.MrANhasalsosubmittedthathewasnotarmedandwassurprisedtolearnthatanotheryouthwasarmed.

45. MrANhasbeeninfulltimeemploymentsince1982.HehasheldseniormanagementrolesatTelstra,LonelyPlanetandSensis.HisprofessionalrefereesprovidedverypositivereferencestoMsSaidinrelationtothepotentialrecruitmentofMrANforthePosition.

46. MrANhasvolunteeredasafire-fighterformorethan10years.HereceivedtheNationalEmergencyMedalforservicesasafire-fighterduringtheBlackSaturdayfires.MrANhasbeenmarriedfor18 yearsandisafathertoa17yearolddaughterand32yearoldstepson.ItisdifficulttoseewhatmoreMrANcouldhavedonetorehabilitatehimself.

6 Consideration

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 13

47. Withthesefactorsinmind,IamnotpersuadedthatthereisasufficientlytightorclosecorrelationbetweentheinherentrequirementofthePositionandtheexclusionofMrAN.IamnotpersuadedthatMrANwasunabletoperformtheinherentrequirementsofthePosition.

48. IconsiderthatANZ’sdecisionnottoengageMrANconstitutesdiscriminationagainstMrANinemploymentoroccupationonthegroundofcriminalrecord.

7 Recommendations49. Where,afterconductinganinquiry,theCommissionfindsthatanactorpracticeengagedinby

arespondentisinconsistentwithorcontrarytoanyhumanright,theCommissionisrequiredtoservenoticeontherespondentsettingoutitsfindingsandreasonsforthosefindings.16TheCommissionmayincludeinthenoticeanyrecommendationforpreventingarepetitionoftheactoracontinuationofthepractice.17

50. TheCommissionmayalsorecommend:

• thepaymentofcompensationto,orinrespectof,apersonwhohassufferedlossordamage;and

• thetakingofotheractiontoremedyorreducethelossordamagesufferedbyaperson.18

7.1 Mr AN’s submissions51. MrANaskedmetomakethefollowingrecommendations:

• ANZtakestepstoamenditspoliciesandprocedurestopreventarepeatofthediscriminationwhichoccurredwithrespecttohim;and

• ANZacknowledgeandapologiseforthehurtandsufferingtheyhavecausedhim.

52. MrANstatedthatalthoughthePositionattractedremunerationof$190perdaymorethanhewaspresentlyearning,hewasnotseekinganycompensation.

7.2 ANZ’s policies and training53. Aspartofthisinquiry,IhaveconsideredANZ’sBackgroundChecksPolicyandGlobal

BackgroundChecksProcessdocument.InotethattheBackgroundChecksPolicyrequiresahiringmanagertoassesswhetherajobapplicant’spolicerecordis‘incompatiblewiththeinherentrequirementsoftherole’.19Whilstthisisanimportantinclusion,IrecommendthatANZfurtherdevelopitspoliciesinrelationtopreventionofdiscriminationonthebasisofcriminalrecord.Inthisregard,IdrawANZ’sattentiontotheCommission’spublicationOn the Record: Guidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of Criminal Record (Guidelines).20

14

54. TheGuidelinesstate:9. A written policy and procedure

Ifanemployerdecidesthatacriminalrecordisrelevanttothepositionsofaworkplace,awrittenpolicycanhelpensurethatallstaffhaveanunderstandingoftheorganisation’srequirementsandthelegalobligationsoftheorganisationtowardspeoplewithacriminalrecord.Apolicyandanoutlineofprocedurecanbeincorporatedintootherworkplacepolicyonequalopportunityandanti-discriminationifsuchpolicyexists.

Ideally,apolicyandprocedurewouldinclude:

• astatementabouttheemployer’scommitmenttotreatingpeoplewithacriminalrecordfairlyandinaccordancewithanti-discrimination,spentconvictionandprivacylaws

• abriefsummaryofemployeeandemployerrightsandresponsibilitiesundertheselaws,orinclusionofup-to-dateliteraturewhichprovidesthisinformation

• anoutlineofotherrelevantlegalrequirementsfortheworkplace,suchastheemployer’sresponsibilitiesunderlicensingandregistrationlaws,orworkingwithchildrenlaws

• theprocedureforassessingtheinherentrequirementsoftheposition,requestingcriminalrecordinformationifnecessaryandassessingindividualjobapplicationsor employeehistories

• informationoninternalorexternalcomplaintorgrievanceproceduresifsomeonethinkstheyhavebeenunfairlytreated

• designatedofficerswithresponsibilityfordifferentelementsoftheprocedure.

Inorderforapolicytogainwidespreadacceptance,itisvitalthatstaff,workplacerepresentativesandmanagementareinvolvedinthedevelopmentofthepolicy.

Developingappropriatepoliciesandproceduresdoesnothavetobeoverlycomplexorlong.However,anypolicyshouldbeclear,informativeandavailabletoallstaffandjobapplicants.

55. IalsorecommendthatANZconducttrainingforitshumanresourcesandmanagementstaffinvolvedinemploymentdecisions.Thistrainingshouldassiststafftoassessfairlywhetheranindividualwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob.Again,IdrawANZ’sattentiontotheGuidelines,whichstateasfollows:

5.10 Assessing a job applicant’s criminal record against the inherent requirements of the job

Insomecases,theconnectionbetweenthecriminalrecordandthejobwillbeclearenoughfortheemployertodecideonthesuitabilityoftheapplicantforthejob…

However,in most cases itwillbeuncleartotheemployersimplyonthebasisoftheresultsofapolicecheckalonewhetherornottheconvictionoroffenceisrelevanttotheinherentrequirementsofthejob…

Anemployerwillgenerallyneedtodiscusstherelevanceofthecriminalrecordwiththejobapplicant,orinvitethemtoprovidefurtherinformation,inordertoassesswhetherthepersoncanmeettheinherentrequirementsofthejob.…

7 Recommendations

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 15

Thetypeofinformationwhichanemployermayneedtoconsiderwhenassessingtherelevanceof a person’scriminalrecordincludes:

• theseriousnessoftheconvictionoroffenceanditsrelevancetothejobinquestion• whetherinrelationtotheoffencetherewasafindingofguiltwithoutconviction,which indicatesalessseriousviewoftheoffencebythecourts

• theageoftheapplicantwhentheoffenceoccurred• thelengthoftimesincetheoffenceoccurred• whethertheapplicanthasapatternofoffences• thecircumstancesinwhichtheoffencetookplace,forexampleifitwasanoffencethattookplaceinawork,domesticorpersonalcontext

• whethertheapplicant’scircumstanceshavechangedsincetheoffencewascommitted…

• whethertheoffencewasdecriminalisedbyParliament…• theattitudeofthejobapplicanttotheirpreviousoffendingbehaviour• referencesfrompeoplewhoknowabouttheoffendinghistory.21

56. IalsodrawANZ’sattentiontoPart4oftheGuidelines,whichdiscusses(amongothermatters)howanemployershoulddeterminewhetheracriminalrecordisrelevanttotheinherentrequirementsofa jobandkeyprinciplesincaselawforassessingtheinherentrequirements.

7.3 Apology57. MrANhasalsosoughtanapology.Iconsiderthattheprovisionofawrittenapologywouldbe

anappropriateremedy.Apologiesareimportantremediesfordiscrimination.They,atleasttosomeextent,alleviatethesufferingofthosewhohavebeenwronged.IrecommendthatANZprovidea formalwrittenapologytoMrANforitsdiscriminatoryconduct.

8 Response to Recommendations58. On23December2014IprovidedanoticetoANZsettingoutmyfindingsandrecommendations

inrelationtothecomplaintdealtwithinthisreport.

59. Byemaildated21January2015,ANZprovidedthefollowingresponsestoeachofmyrecommendations.

60. InrelationtomyrecommendationthatANZfurtherdevelopitspoliciesinrelationtothepreventionof discriminationinemploymentonthebasisofcriminalrecord,ANZstated:

ANZ’sglobalBackgroundChecksPolicyisreviewedannually.IndependentlyofMrAN’scomplaint,ANZrecentlyrevieweditsBackgroundChecksPolicy,includingthesectiononcriminalrecordchecks.ANZhasalwaystakentheageofaconvictionintoconsideration.However,asaresultofthereviewandrelevanttoMrAN’scomplaint,ANZnowplacesgreateremphasisontheageofacriminalconvictionindeterminingwhetheranemployeeor contractorcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofarole.

16

61. InrelationtomyrecommendationthatANZconducttrainingtoassiststafftofairlyassesswhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularjob,ANZstated:

AsaresultofthereviewoftheBackgroundChecksPolicy,ANZwillconductrefreshertrainingwiththerelevantrecruitmentdecisionmakersonassessingwhetherajobapplicantwithacriminalrecordcanperformtheinherentrequirementsofaparticularrole.

62. InrelationtomyrecommendationthatANZprovideaformalwrittenapologytoMrAN,ANZstated:

ANZrespectfullydeclinestoprovideaformalwrittenapologytoMrANforthefollowingreasons:

• MrANdidnotdisclosehiscriminalrecordwhenaskedtodosoduringtherecruitmentprocess;

• sinceMrANhasmadehiscomplaint,hehasprovidedconflictinginformationaboutthereasonhedidnotdisclosehiscriminalrecord;and

• ANZholdsitsemployeesandcontractorstothehighestlevelsofintegrityandhonesty.MrANhadbeenconvictedofarmedrobberywithviolencewhilstincompany,whichisaseriouscriminaloffence.ItisANZ’spositionthat,duetothenatureoftheoffenceforwhichhewasconvicted,MrANcouldnotfulfiltheinherentrequirementsoftherole,whichincludedthatheactinaccordancewithANZ’sCodeofConductanddisplayhonestyandintegrity.

63. IreportaccordinglytotheAttorney-General.

GillianTriggsPresidentAustralianHumanRightsCommission

March2015

8 Response to Recommendations

AN v ANZ Banking Group Limited • [2015] AusHRC 93 • 17

1 Australian Human Rights Commission Regulations 1989 (Cth)reg4(a)(iii).2 Victoria v Macedonian Teachers’ Association of Victoria Inc(1999)91FCR47.3 Criminal Law (Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act 1986 (Qld)s3(2)statesthat‘theonlyconvictionsinrelationtowhicha

rehabilitationperiodiscapableofrunningareconvictionsuponwhich–(a)theoffenderisnotorderedtoserveanyperiodincustody;or(b)theoffenderisorderedtoserveaperiodnotexceeding30monthsincustody(includingorderedbywayofdefault),whetherornotintheeventtheoffenderisrequiredtoactuallyserveanypartofthatperiodincustody’.

4 Commonwealth v Bradley (1999)95FCR218,235(BlackCJ).5 Commonwealth v Hamilton (2000)108FCR378,385.6 InternationalLabourOrganisation,General Survey: Discrimination in the field of employment and occupation,(1988),ILC,

(42nd Session,1988ReportIV(1)),[86].7 X v Commonwealth (1999)200CLR177,222-223[146](KirbyJ);Qantas Airways Ltd v Christie (1998)193CLR280,333[152.4]

andfootnotes168-169(KirbyJ).ThisapproachhasbeenappliedtoPartII,Division4oftheSex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)inGardner v All Australian Netball Association Limited (2003)197ALR28,[19],[23]-[24](RaphaelFM);Ferneley v Boxing Authority of New South Wales (2001)191ALR739,[89](WilcoxJ).

8 Qantas Airways v Christie(1998)193CLR280,294[34](GaudronJ).9 X v Commonwealth(1999)200CLR177,208[102](GummowandHayneJJ).10 X v Commonwealth (1999)200CLR177,[43](McHughJ).11 InternationalLabourOrganisation,General Survey: Equality in Employment and Occupation,(1988),[126].SeealsoQantas

Airways Ltd v Christie (1998)193CLR280,[72](McHughJ).12 (1998)158ALR468.13 (1998)158ALR468,482.14 (1999)95FCR218.15 (1999)95FCR218,235-236.16 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)s35(2)(a).17 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)s35(2)(b).18 Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth)s35(2)(c).19 ANZBackgroundChecksPolicy,section4.2.20 Availableathttps://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/human_rights/criminalrecord/on_the_record/download/

otr_guidelines.pdf.21 On the Record: Guidelines for the Prevention of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of Criminal Record,availableat

https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/human_rights/criminalrecord/on_the_record/download/otr_guidelines.pdf,14-19.

FurtherInformationAustralian Human Rights Commission

Level 3, 175 Pitt StreetSYDNEY NSW 2000

GPO Box 5218SYDNEY NSW 2001Telephone: (02) 9284 9600

Complaints Infoline: 1300 656 419General enquiries and publications: 1300 369 711TTY: 1800 620 241Fax: (02) 9284 9611Website: www.humanrights.gov.au

For detailed and up to date information about the Australian Human Rights Commission visit our website at: www.humanrights.gov.au

To order more publications from the Australian Human Rights Commission download a Publication Order Form at: www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/index.html or call: (02) 9284 9600 fax: (02) 9284 9611 or email: publications@humanrights.gov.au

Australian Human Rights Commissionwww.humanrights.gov.au