Stokes v Serco Sodexho Defence Services Pty Ltd [2006] NSWADT 295

Stokes v Serco Sodexho Defence Services Pty Ltd [2006] NSWADT 295

The Tribunal found that Ms Stokes did not establish that Serco’s actions in changing her roster or restricting her duties amounted to unlawful discrimination on the grounds of either disability or carer’s responsibility. The relevant changes to work arrangements were based on operational and medical needs, and when the respondent became aware of the impact on Ms Stokes’ carer responsibilities, the arrangements were promptly adjusted. The requirements imposed were not shown to be unreasonable or more onerous for people with carer responsibilities or disabilities. Ms Stokes also failed to follow proper procedures for leave, and there was insufficient evidence that she suffered relevant...

Parties
Applicant: Armida Stokes; Respondent: Serco Sodexho Defence Services Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Equal Opportunity/discrimination / Final Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Carers' Responsibility Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, Roster Changes, Leave Entitlements
Discrimination Law Employment Law Carers' Responsibility Discrimination Disability Discrimination Roster Changes Leave Entitlements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Armida Stokes

Applicant

Serco Sodexho Defence Services Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Equal Opportunity/discrimination / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent engaged in unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability and/or carer's responsibility under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 in relation to changes to the applicant’s roster, refusal of leave, and work duties.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that Ms Stokes did not establish that Serco’s actions in changing her roster or restricting her duties amounted to unlawful discrimination on the grounds of either disability or carer’s responsibility. The relevant changes to work arrangements were based on operational and medical needs, and when the respondent became aware of the impact on Ms Stokes’ carer responsibilities, the arrangements were promptly adjusted. The requirements imposed were not shown to be unreasonable or more onerous for people with carer responsibilities or disabilities. Ms Stokes also failed to follow proper procedures for leave, and there was insufficient evidence that she suffered relevant...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • That the Applicant's application is dismissed