Casino Canberra has lost its tribunal appeal in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) after being ordered to compensate a long-time employee for discriminating against him.
About 3 years ago, Bryan Bradford Kidman, an employee of Casino Canberra for almost 20 years, raised concerns regarding the rights of casino workers amid a potential ownership change of the gambling venue. At the time, he informed a local media hub – The Canberra Times – that the casino’s employees had received no information regarding staffing levels, working conditions, and wages.
The long-time worker made the revelations at a time when the casino’s owner, Aquis Entertainment, was being taken over by Blue Whale Entertainment, so casino workers were supposed to receive some information regarding the acquisition and its effects on their salaries and on the overall working conditions. The interview with The Canberra Times came after the United Voice Union (now known as United Workers Union) had held discussions with the casino about the ownership transaction worth AU$32 million, which eventually failed.
At the time of his interview with the local media hub, Mr Kidman shared that the workers’ union sought written assurances for its members that the impending deal would not lead to forced lay-offs, changes to rosters or outsourcing of work. However, no one provided the United Voice Union’s members with such assurances and the casino shared its preference to see any bargaining process initiated only after the sale is finalised.
Casino Canberra Ordered to Pay over AU$8,000 in Damages to Long-Time Worker for Discrimination
A couple of days following the interview’s publication, Casino Canberra and its in-house legal counsel got in contact with Mr Kidman and shared their concerns, including the ones associated with the casino’s required standards of employee behaviour.
A formal complaint was lodged with the ACT Human Rights Commission by a union organiser, with the complaint then being referred to the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Mr Kidman claimed that the casino writing to him regarding the aforementioned terms constituted discrimination.
In July 2020, the Tribunal found that Casino Canberra had violated a section of the Discrimination Act by subjecting its worker to unfavourable treatment due to Mr Kidman’s industrial activity and eventually ruled in his favour. It issued an order for the casino to pay the complainant a total of AU$8,620.
The gambling operator, however, complied with only one of the orders and appealed 3 others.
According to two members of the appeal tribunal, the detailed submissions clearly showed that the casino wanted the appeal to be allowed. They further noted that Casino Canberra did not comply with three of the tribunal’s orders, including the findings that its actions had been discriminatory and the order that Mr Kidman has to be paid compensation. The casino claimed that the proposed sale would not have affected its existing statutory or contractual obligations under the enterprise agreement, so its employees would not have been affected.
The casino’s legal appeal, however, has been recently dismissed by the appeal tribunal, whose members backed the original tribunal’s decision. They noted that Mr Kidman was taking part in a lawful activity organising the union that represented the union member’s interests. The appeal tribunal’s members also shared they agreed with the original ruling of the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal that the complainant faced unfavourable treatment due to his industrial activity.
- Author
Olivia Cole
