Lawyer / Type of Lawyer Recommendations for Gov Job/ HR Issues?

tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 10:02

Hi all,

Just wonder what lawyer / lawyer type I should be pursuing for multiple issues from SA Gov HR?

What area of law etc would this be challenged? I've approached the Employment tribunal for clarification of my employment contract. I feel this is the "arena" lawyers would pursue.

However, I'm now looking for a compensation element, as it is so long. So no idea where to go.

My issue:

  1. Was supposed to be placed full time ongoing x km max . front home, and a list of sites. They forgot to place me (they referenced a system issue/ failure). Then placed me at 0.4 fraction for 10 weeks!

1b. Then Placed me again, double the allowable distance from home. In the wrong area of expertise, in the wrong category of complexity.
Wasn't remotely sustainable. Ended up on an accepted work cover claim (after union legal action). RTW said you must now place correctly. They got it worse.

  1. HR acquired my medical records without consent.

The surgery was informed by phone and in person that my details are not to be shared - they assured me Dr/ patient confidentiality protects this, it won't happen unless I sign authorisation). I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information. This did not happen

I emailed HR multiple times prior explicitly stating all medical records will come from / through me in all cases. No exceptions.

I have no issues with the records themselves, but I do have massive issues in the conduct.

5 years later, my employment conditions are still not met. It exposed me to a work injury, and now ethics policies are being breached.

Had enough…

  • PS. Union are useless in this space. I know realise the work cover strategy they pursued was useless. In fact harmful for future employment prospects. The actual core issue was never addressed. Told in writing it would be resolved in the Return to Work process. HR simply ignored the Return to Work framework without consequence.

The Union are significant financial supporters / sponsors of the government currently in place. They have only provided incorrect information to date, and absolutely will not challenge the current government in power. Also too busy to challenge anything outside the norm.

So any tips on who to approach from here?

Thanks

Education & Work Lawyer

Comments

Best
Search through all the comments in this post.
  • coffeeinmyveins on 06/05/2026 - 11:00

    I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information. This did not happen

    I seriously doubt your company fabricated a document outlining that you gave them permission to access your medical records. I also doubt that your doctor would release them without having gotten explicit permission from you .

    5 years later

    Something doesn't add up with your story. To be honest this feels like you're missing certain key bits of information. If your work truly did fabricate a document to gain access to your medical records then contact OAIC and lawyer up. but yeah, i feel like you're not telling us everything.

    • 4
    • Muppet Detector on 06/05/2026 - 23:48

      I seriously doubt your company fabricated a document outlining that you gave them permission to access your medical records. I also doubt that your doctor would release them without having gotten explicit permission from you .

      They didn't need to.

      It seems like OP gave them all the necessary consent when he signed the Workers Comp claim form.

      WorkCover Claims & Medical Records Guide

      • 4
      • coffeeinmyveins on 07/05/2026 - 07:43

        and there it is.

        • 1
        • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:10

          No, this doesn't have anything to do with Work cover.

          They are not involved in any way.

          • 0
    • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 11:57

      I agree, and am also in disbelief.

      Unfortunately very much true.. surgery documents consent from employer on x date..

      I was on holiday on that date and certainly wasn't dealing with HR.

      Someone is lieing…

      • -1
      • weezlebub on 06/05/2026 - 12:19

        *lying

        side note, work cover means work related injury and an insurance claim, since your work pays for all medical bills until workcover reimburses them, they are the customer, not you …

        if you paid all medical out of pocket, you have a right to privacy, if you told work / doctor that it's workcover, then your implied privacy wouldn't be relevant because you're using their services …

        • 8
        • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 08:22

          if you told work / doctor that it's workcover, then your implied privacy wouldn't be relevant because you're using their services …

          Wellllll

          It's not that it's not relevant, it's just that OP probably gave his consent for the doctor to release the records.

          They only lose their privacy/confidentiality when they sign their WorkCover claim form which says they give consent for doctor to release the medical reports.

          • 2
        • Deridas on 06/05/2026 - 19:42

          I think you may be correct. If you're going through WorkCover your workplace is the client (because they're paying), so all the intellectual paperwork rights belong to them/WorkCover.
          Not 100% sure but it makes sense.

          • 1
      • Muppet Detector on 06/05/2026 - 23:51

        I was on holiday on that date and certainly wasn't dealing with HR.

        Highly likely that HR were dealing with WorkCover though.

        Who signed your WorkCover forms that gave them permission to retrieve your medical information from the doctor?

        • 2
        • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:09

          Work cover have zero involvement here.

          They provided a finding at the end, and listed conditions the employer must follow. The employer didn't oblige. Work cover advised meto seek legal counsel and was finished/ closed off.

          So now its simply me vs employer.

          • 0
          • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 14:17

            @tunzafun001: Why didn't you want your employer to have the records?

            BTW, doctor won't normally release his physical records to you voluntarily. Those records may be about you but they are his intellectual property.

            So can't see how you were going to give them to employer.

            Too much missing here.

            Doctor did not release those records to employer without proof you consented (or he royally screwed up). It would cost him his licence. He did not just believe them that they said "we have his consent".

            • 0
  • MS Paint on 06/05/2026 - 11:51

    Sounds like they are just shuffling around dead wood and it's nearly impossible to fire people these days.

    • 4
    • Gunnar on 06/05/2026 - 12:09

      The fact that the OP claims the Union was useless to help them is probably the biggest indicator of the type of employee the OP is

      • 4
      • weezlebub on 06/05/2026 - 12:23

        nah, i've dealt with union relating to government (and telstra when it was 50% government owned) and they were actually hopeless …

        i'd suggest, starting with a freedom of information request (this will be publicly disclosed) - it'll need to be relatively specific
        take the information to fair work sa
        when that goes nowhere
        take it to a lawyer

        • 1
        • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 01:11

          Hospitality union useless as an ashtray on a motorbike as well.

          • 0
        • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:15

          Yep, got all the information via FOI..

          Now just need to find the right legal counsel.

          I have spoken to a couple and the biggest barriers are
          1. The handling is so ridiculous, there isnt a precedent for it.
          2. It's a state government.

          • 0
      • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 12:20

        I accept that from the outside. But I have 4 friends who work/ left employment at the Union itself. I very much had extra / inside "access". There are huge issues/ conflicts of interest there. Look at the staff turnover/ leadership changes in the last 26 months. Near 80%… Ignore what I say, but don't ignore the data!

        • 0
      • SlickMick on 07/05/2026 - 08:24

        Nah I know somebody fighting a workplace issue, and half the battle is with the union.

        • 0
    • Onemoredeal on 06/05/2026 - 21:26

      That’s how NSW govt works

      • 0
    • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 12:05

      As above, I'm in the highest classification in my field. Sadly, I have sites requesting my employment..denied purely on red tape created by HR.

      In conversation, they indeed group me in the dead wood bucket.Was A grade timber…but now very much starting to rot

      Anyway, any insight into legal course to pursue?

      • -3
      • GardenGnome on 06/05/2026 - 15:42

        If you're asking on an OZ bargain's forum for legal advice, then you're not going anywhere soon.

        Why not just quit and work in the private sector? Ahh I get it cushy union pay with benefits with zero accountability or standards now leeching off Workcover.

        • 4
  • JIMB0 on 06/05/2026 - 10:18

    Bikies

    • 3
    • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 11:54

      Ha!

      Got to love the term 'bikies' in Oz… Not 'bikers'… But cute little "bikies"..

      They will come around and tickle you until you give in….

      • -6
  • p1 ama on 06/05/2026 - 21:27

    Just wonder what lawyer / lawyer type I should be pursuing for multiple issues from SA Gov HR?

    Employment lawyer, sometimes they generally will advertise themselves as workers' compensation lawyers or workplace injury lawyers as that's generally most of the work that they do.

    However, that being said, I read through your post and I genuinely cannot see what exactly you are engaging a lawyer for. I think before you engage with a lawyer, you need to know exactly what is the outcome that you are trying to achieve such that the lawyer can advise you on what your options are and whether that is realistic.

    The idea that you're simply just looking for "a compensation element" doesn't seem to make sense to me. If you're seeking compensation, you need to specify what the compensation is for exactly and what the material loss is.

    Was supposed to be placed full time ongoing x km max . front home, and a list of sites. They forgot to place me (they referenced a system issue/ failure). Then placed me at 0.4 fraction for 10 weeks!

    I have no idea what this sentence means. Are you a full time or casual employee?

    If you are a full time employee, then why are you complaining if you were only allocated 40% of the work you were supposed to do?

    If you are a casual employee, then there's no expectation of consistent hours, so you only work what you are rostered for. If it's 40% of what you expected (or of FTE), then that's just the downside of being casual.

    1b. Then Placed me again, double the allowable distance from home. In the wrong area of expertise, in the wrong category of complexity. Wasn't remotely sustainable. Ended up on an accepted work cover claim (after union legal action). RTW said you must now place correctly. They got it worse.

    Did you sit down with anyone and have a conversation about what happened?

    HR acquired my medical records without consent.The surgery was informed by phone and in person that my details are not to be shared - they assured me Dr/ patient confidentiality protects this, it won't happen unless I sign authorisation). I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information. This did not happen

    Are you suggesting that HR forged your authorisation? I think this is a deeper issue than just employment law if that's the case.

    I emailed HR multiple times prior explicitly stating all medical records will come from / through me in all cases. No exceptions. I have no issues with the records themselves, but I do have massive issues in the conduct.

    Agreed the conduct is unacceptable.

    5 years later, my employment conditions are still not met. It exposed me to a work injury, and now ethics policies are being breached.

    How did it take 5 years to come to this point?

    At what point in the journey did you realise something was wrong? Did you ever consider leaving for a different job or to take action to rectify it?

    From your post, I can't quite ascertain what the work injury is. It seems that the disagreement with your workplace was over (i) the distance from home you were working, and (ii) the "area of expertise" you were working in. I don't see how any of these disagreements lead to a workplace injury.

    So any tips on who to approach from here?

    Just had a quick look at some of your previous posts. Have you ever had a conversation with someone trusted (e.g. a friend, partner, family member, perhaps even a counsellor or doctor) about why all of these things seem to happen to you?

    You seem to have issues with your employer, with your car repair, with your insurance, with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (ACFA), with Commonwealth Bank settling your funds into the wrong account, with a hack to your Crypto account, with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) over numerous audits.

    I can't seem to tell whether these are made up stories, or if all of this has happened to someone, and they've never stopped to ask what's the common thread amongst all of these things and trying to fix some of the root causes.

    • 3
    • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 01:53

      Agreed the conduct is unacceptable.

      It looks like he probably gave his consent when he signed his workers comp claim form.

      WorkCover Claims & Medical Records Guide

      Will turn on whether HR had some sort of obligation to collect the records to forward to WorkCover when processing the claim.

      That link does say "WorkCover or insurer", so unsure if employer somehow becomes incorporated into or included in that process.

      Also depends on what the document is the doctor showed. I can't work out if it was a specific letter from HR saying "send reports, employee consents, here is his signature to prove it", or some notation in a file from the doctor's surgery saying "released records to HR on this date something something consent re workers comp claim".

      I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information

      Yeah, it didn't say that, at least not in its entirety. No way doc is going to release records to a third party without some kind of evidence or confirmation.

      ME: heyPaul's doctor, I am Paul's employer and he said it's ok for you to give me his medical records, just trust me.

      Doctor: oh, ok will just send these forms off to muppet detector about my patient Paul without proof of who they are and who said what to whom.

      Yeah/nah, that didn't happen.

      • 1
      • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:26

        Well, you seem constantly in disbelief. But it happened. The surgery received an email from HR that says I gave authorisation last week. I did not.

        I have this email from the surgery, and I also asked them if it was ok if I record the phone conversation to refer back to what exactly is being stated here in the future. They agreed.

        No offense, but I don't want to waste any more time proving what happened. I just want to know a proven legal entity that would deal with such evidence. Emails, letters, phone reports / logs, policy documents, contact conditions, placement history.. All documented.

        • 0
        • p1 ama on 07/05/2026 - 14:41

          No offense, but I don't want to waste any more time proving what happened.

          You want to bring a legal case, but you don't want to "prove what happened"?

          If you story doesn't add up to random people on the internet, it won't convince a magistrate or tribunal.

          I just want to know a proven legal entity that would deal with such evidence. Emails, letters, phone reports / logs, policy documents, contact conditions, placement history.. All documented.

          You can see a lawyer, but at this stage, it'll just be wasting your money until you can get your story straight about what happened.

          I would actually consider seeing a GP, mental health professional, or counsellor before you see a lawyer. Whilst they won't give you legal advice, they will be able to help you make sense of what's going on and figure out where you can go from here.

          • 0
  • tsunamisurfer on 06/05/2026 - 11:07

    I stand by Gov SA.

    You sound like a horror employee.

    • 2
    • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 12:01

      Ironically, I have the highest classification and won two gov awards the year prior to HRs failure. One presented to me by the local MP.
      20 years of service with awards.

      Was an excellent employee… now very much a horrible employee.

      Any insight into legal course to pursue?

      • -3
      • GardenGnome on 06/05/2026 - 15:45

        Sadly, and I mean this sincerely I doubt your claims. If you need to ask randoms on a bargain's forum about industrial relations, you win the Darwin award.

        • 2
        • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:11

          All factual and documented.

          Just need to find the right people to send the documents to.

          • 0
          • GardenGnome on 07/05/2026 - 16:26

            @tunzafun001: I'll give some sound advice since I've known people in your position of being shadow banned or ghosted at work. If you're a long-term older Gov employee I would ask around about leave/severance packages @ work, they will probably be thankful if they are trying to get rid of you anyway. In the end you have to decide whether it's worth the money and your mental health to get a good lawyer and go through the expensive task of suing the government which will probably take years to resolve.

            The best-case scenario is you leave before your fired with some severance pay that will help you for a year or two while you look for another job.

            Once a higher up be that your manager, HR or supervisor thinks your surplus to requirements there is little you can do to change their mind. My advice is asking around about severance packages and then take the money and find another job in the private sector. Pay and conditions might not be as good, and you will have less security, but do you really want to deal with the bullshit of expensive lawyers and a workplace that doesn't want you.

            TLDR: Seek a package/buy out since you're in Gov, leave with your dignity and mental health, take a holiday and relax and look after yourself.

            • 0
  • mskeggs on 06/05/2026 - 12:30

    What are you seeking to happen? This will work inform who can represent you.
    If you want change to the system to reduce the chances of someone "slipping through the cracks" due to system issues etc, then I would stick with the union. FWIW, they represent their members, choices to fund one side of politics are because they believe they can get a better deal for members from that side.

    If you want an apology about access to health records, assuming they weren't during your work cover period, talk to the privacy commissioner.

    If you want to get a different work position because you feel they are in breach of specific terms of your contract, there are employment lawyers (not workers comp lawyers) who can represent contract disputes.

    • 2
    • weezlebub on 06/05/2026 - 15:54

      Going back to Unions, I'll try to be brief on my specific situation (many) years ago …

      Hired as contractor on ASO1 to do a CFW7 role …

      There nearly 5 years, government brought out rule that said contractors in a role for 12+ months need to be made fulltime …

      Asked for fulltime, they said that the work was split between complex and simplex … I explained that I was in the complex team, had trained and mentored 80% of the hires over the previous 3 years … was still no …

      Contacted Union, they said that our contributions added up to around 5k per year for those impacted and the cost to represent would be in excess of 50k so they weren't going to anything …

      • 1
    • mskeggs on 06/05/2026 - 12:33

      Googling employment contract lawyer Adelaide gives several results, I don't know any of those firms, so I can't make a recommendation, but a few phone calls might get you an idea if you have a case.
      Bear in mind "and other duties as assigned" and similar clauses will often water down your position unless it is in specific opposition to another clause.

      • 0
      • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 13:13

        Thank you very much.

        Exactly what I was looking for re privacy commissioner / employment legal.

        Absolutely correct re "other duties", but have already ascertained from a work cover lawyer that there is a section 18 "must be returned to an equivalent and suitable position prior to work cover" clause. Absolutely 'legal words' to determine, ie what does "equivalent and suitable" mean exactly. But other breaches are back and white. Ie 45km max rule, given 104km. Sadly, too hard for the union. It's a outside the norm issue I guess. I don't know why they don't follow the same path given by two external legal chats.
        So ultimately, just want mine sorted and indeed also insure a precedent is made so it doesn't happen to anyone else. This process did see me with no income for 17 months. No family should go through that due to no fault of their own.
        FWIW - my employer has already made recruitment policy amendments around the wording applied to my issue. So have already made some change ,and also shows they are aware they got it wrong prior. Just need a judge to come to the same conclusion…

        • 0
        • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 00:31

          This process did see me with no income for 17 months.

          Why?

          ie what does "equivalent and suitable"

          Pretty much, if you had an equivalent title and wage and the work was suitable (as in your WorkCover injury hasn't resulted in some kind of permanent condition or disability that prevents you from doing the duties your required to do upon return to work) then they're pretty much meeting that.

          It basically means if you were the manager earning $100k per year, they have to return you to the equivalent of that and not demote you to the janitor position paying you $25k per year.

          And if your WorkCover injury meant you lost an arm, they can't require you to do a job that needs two arms (even if that's what you could do before the injury).

          This often looks a lot like someone who previously had to lift heavy weights (22kg is generally legal), but your injury now means you can only lift 10kg or have 20% reduced capacity or flexibility in something like your back, that your employer can't make you lift that 22kg anymore etc. they have to contain your duties to what your new circumstances now allow you to do (as per specialist medical reports and documentation).

          But other breaches are back and white. Ie 45km max rule, given 104km.

          Completely different requiring different action. This is a basic employment contract issue. Why did this take you so long to address before you ended up injuring yourself? Sounds like it was at least 6 to 12 months, not just a few weeks.

          When you showed them your signed employment contract that said xyz, what did they say to you when you told them you were getting abc and that wasn't what you agreed to?

          What was in the employment contract that you signed and agreed to (not what was verbally offered or agreed to).

          So have already made some change ,and also shows they are aware they got it wrong prior.

          Yeah, that's not doing the heavy lifting that you think it is. Don't get caught up on that unless it is relevant to some kind of personal injury/negligence claim.

          They're generally only liable/negligent until they become aware of a problem and fail to fix it/correct it. Generally, not liable for things they didn't know about. (Unless some legal standard, law or requirement such as WHS that they are legally obligated to know about and prevent/address).

          Whatever that document or policy previously said or didn't say, they're obviously now aware that it caused misunderstanding or something so have clarified it or outlined a specific protocol or procedure (like you see how US police read Miranda rights word for word to people, even though everybody probably already knows the general idea).

          Just need a judge to come to the same conclusion…

          The fact they have amended procedures/wording etc once they became aware of a problem will probably work in the employer's favour unless it was some blatant illegal thing such as "don't hire black disabled people" (which more than likely breaches discrimination laws) kinda thing.

          • 0
  • Wiadro on 06/05/2026 - 10:36

    tldr?

    • 1
    • Gunnar on 06/05/2026 - 10:54

      OP needs assistance with an industrial law matter with SA Govt. Union has allegedly been useless in helping with them with their patchy and (understandably) one-sided story.

      • 4
      • Wiadro on 06/05/2026 - 10:57

        sounds like a standard issue on ozbargain

        • 3
      • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 11:55

        Plus.. un ethical behavior obtaining medical information by deceit.

        • -1
        • Muppet Detector on 06/05/2026 - 23:34

          Plus.. un ethical behavior obtaining medical information by deceit.

          The surgery was informed by phone and in person that my details are not to be shared - they assured me Dr/ patient confidentiality protects this, it won't happen unless I sign authorisation)

          "If a patient pursues a claim, WorkCover (or their appointed insurer) will likely need access to their medical records."

          "By signing the WorkCover claim form, patients give permission to the WorkCover insurer to obtain their medical information."

          "WorkCover insurers request these records to understand the patient's medical history and determine what may be relevant to the claimed injury, or if there is a history of similar injuries or conditions prior to the claimed injury."

          Know your legal obligations.

          What did you agree to when you signed your WorkCover claim form?

          I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information. This did not happen

          Apparently it did. Likely HR was responsible for collecting everything to submit with your claim as they processed it..

          I emailed HR multiple times prior explicitly stating all medical records will come from / through me in all cases. No exceptions.

          Haha, they don't give you the opportunity to change any information lol.

          Additionally, the records may be about you, but their IP remains with the doctor or whomever created them unless a court order directs otherwise.

          Whilst the doc has his confidentiality requirements, if you signed that legal document, you gave him permission to disclose them to whomever had the legal right or if a court orders them to be released.

          You made an insurance claim against your employer for a medical reason. The insurer gets to have some proof of that if you want them to proceed with your claim lol.

          ROFL "Trust me bro".

          • 5
          • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:06

            @Muppet Detector: Have no issue with work cover obtaining records. They sided with my position. But regardless, that ceased years ago.

            HR on the other hand have no right to my personal medical records without my consent. They sent me the forms, I clearly instructed them I will not be signing and any records will come from me only.

            • 0
        • tenpercent on 06/05/2026 - 13:40

          Did you get a copy of whatever document they supplied to your Dr in order to obtain them?
          Are you sure it wasn't the Dr or their office's fault?

          • 1
  • djkelly69 on 06/05/2026 - 12:46

    Employment lawyer is the answer to the question

    • 1
  • boomramada on 06/05/2026 - 10:21

    Why not try them ?

    • 0
    • tunzafun001 on 06/05/2026 - 12:14

      Thanks, but these guys try to get you on workers comp.
      Already done that. But the issue itself was never addressed. Return to work is a toothless tiger if you have a non compliant employer. They advised me to pursue the inaction legally, but cannot provide advice as to who that would be.
      Normally an industrial law/ employment lawyer. Spoke to a couple, but haven't found anyone who know how to deal with repeat system failure. Ie. The issue isn't me, it's indemic/ large scale action.

      • 0
      • Muppet Detector on 06/05/2026 - 23:16

        But the issue itself was never addressed

        Which issue? You mentioned a few. What outcome are you hoping to achieve? How much money do you want to spend?

        try to get you on workers comp.

        Were you injured at work? What was the operation for? Who payed for that?

        Ended up on an accepted work cover claim (after union legal action).

        And what was so bad that you required corrective surgery but had to force legal action to get the claim approved?

        • 0
  • AustriaBargain on 06/05/2026 - 18:33

    Have you tried calling HR and being a bit assertive? It is possible to talk your way into higher brackets and such as long as it's not a huge leap.

    • 0
  • Muppet Detector on 06/05/2026 - 22:54

    So any tips on who to approach from here?

    I can't work out what outcome you're wanting to achieve?

    Do you want them to meet the terms of the contract?

    Some issue with work cover or a personal injury claim?

    Some penalty or compensation for the medical files that you believe are your IP and not that of work cover/employer the people paying for/insuring the incident that you are claiming is your employer's fault?

    Some penalty for the union?

    • 0
  • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 00:56

    HR acquired my medical records without consent.
    The surgery was informed by phone and in person that my details are not to be shared - they assured me Dr/ patient confidentiality protects this, it won't happen unless I sign authorisation). I called the surgery, and they produced a document from HR saying I gave authorization to my employer to release my private information. This did not happen

    I emailed HR multiple times prior explicitly stating all medical records will come from / through me in all cases. No exceptions.

    I have no issues with the records themselves, but I do have massive issues in the conduct.

    Then why did you go to so much effort to try and prevent them from getting access to them in the first place?

    Why did it even cross your mind to prevent them from having them in the first place?

    BTW, if anybody did create fraudulent documents, that's a criminal offence, that's a separate action again.

    • 0
  • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 08:31

    Was supposed to be placed full time ongoing x km max . front home, and a list of sites. They forgot to place me (they referenced a system issue/ failure). Then placed me at 0.4 fraction for 10 weeks!

    FWIW - my employer has already made recruitment policy amendments around the wording applied to my issue.

    What is in the actual employment contract that you signed with them and thus agreed to when you began your employment with them?

    Not what you think was supposed to happen, but what you actually ended up signing and agreeing to?

    • 0
    • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:36

      Thanks, something to discuss. But I just want to get back to work. Sad reality is there are two jobs in my field 800m from my home.. very easy solution you would think…but the position is in a different 'financial pool' to mine (its not a permanent role), so I can't have it. Even though I haven't been given a permanent role since 2017!
      Basically there are two executives at the end of these two pools. One exec's bottom line will be compromised if they pay my salary from their pool. My salary shouldnt come.from their pool.
      So will make it harder to hit a kpi / bonus.
      I'm also a product of government change. When I signed my contract I was given x, y, z conditions. They now say the budget is cut and they can't offer said conditions any more, or more specifically, there isn't a position that meets those conditions. My rebutle..make one…but again…there is an exec at the end with more power than me. I'm a little flexible, but been given non permanent roles, not in my field, 2+ hr commutes away…is ridiculous. I also had to serve 14 years to "earn" these conditions. I've done 17 years, and no better than being fresh out of uni. Too old for 4hr commutes these days.
      I'm very confident in what the contract stipulates. I've had that part legally verified. But finding someone willing to go into bat to get it enforced is where I'm struggling. They all say the Union is your best bet…. It isn't!!

      • 0
      • Muppet Detector on 07/05/2026 - 19:58

        Thanks, something to discuss. But I just want to get back to work. Sad reality is there are two jobs in my field 800m from my home.. very easy solution you would think…but the position is in a different 'financial pool' to mine (its not a permanent role), so I can't have it. Even though I haven't been given a permanent role since 2017!

        Ok, so

        • you're not working now.

        • You haven't had a permanent role since 2017
          (that must be so hard, it is very difficult to be trying to provide for yourself, far less an entire family when you don't really have any job security or stability. I'm sorry that you're in that position).

        • you want to work

        • there are position(s) available really close by
          (which is something important to you)

        • the negative is that it isn't a permanent role.
          You haven't had a permanent role since 2017 and you currently have no role, so given everything else, I don't understand why this is stopping you from taking this position?

        When I signed my contract I was given x, y, z conditions. They now say the budget is cut and they can't offer said conditions any more, or more specifically, there isn't a position that meets those conditions

        Weird they can just change a legally binding contract without mutual agreement or court order.

        My rebutle..make one…but again…there is an exec at the end with more power than me

        "Make one" seems to be the logical (and legal) initial response to this situation.

        If they can't do that, I thought this was when redundancy situations arose.

        I'm a little flexible, but been given non permanent roles, not in my field, 2+ hr commutes away…is ridiculous.

        And this may be where your arguments become weaker. When you accepted these roles, This would probably be interpreted as you agreeing to change the terms of your contract (even if nothing signed, acceptance can be determined by performance - aka you worked under the new conditions).

        This is the point where you needed to push back and refuse to changing the terms of your contract, not multiple jobs down the track when the terms of your original contract has arguably been significantly changed by mutual agreement (on multiple occasions) so as the original contract is no longer recognised or able to be wound back.

        I also had to serve 14 years to "earn" these conditions.

        I think where this all falls apart for you is that it isn't that you "earned" these conditions, but that you agreed to them.

        Everything else after this is really not very relevant and just creates a confusing (profanity) of unfortunate events.

        All of those additional events are likely why everybody wants to wipe their hands of it and have nothing to do with unravelling what seems to be a very expensive unwinable fight.

        Too old for 4hr commutes these days.

        Job up the road must be looking pretty good then, no?

        I'm very confident in what the contract stipulates. I've had that part legally verified. But finding someone willing to go into bat to get it enforced is where I'm struggling.

        As above, I think you're struggling because that initial contract no longer exists and trying to work out what you've currently got just seems insurmountable.

        They all say the Union is your best bet…. It isn't!!

        I only really have book knowledge of unions (from a business degree subject called "Employment Relations" so I've spent a few hours revisiting that and researching what the actual role of a union is.

        Thus, I tend to agree with you.

        It seems their role is more inline with supporting the "whole of the workforce" as opposed to supporting individual contracts within that overarching framework. Example being how the teacher's union was representing the employment conditions for all the teachers, not just an individual agreement.

        I'm guessing that this will also be how your employer is able to show that they complied with the Workers Comp directions.

        You were returned to the equivalent and suitable position that you held at the time of the injury - aka the "new contract" as opposed to what you initially agreed to when the original contract was created.

        • 0
        • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 23:01

          Well, I just wrote a large reply to clarify (appreciate your time). But Telstra dropped out when I hit submit…and the post is gone. Urghh…

          Summary, on the right track. Point of difference is the black and white recruitment policy states a roll over if placed prior. But I was never placed. The system left me out. Alledgedly never happened before. But HR have 'ultimate discretion' to make it right…but don't…as again, it would hurt another execs section.
          I found my own external position after that. So roll over conditions don't exist. No placement has occurred. There was a placement offer presented after this, but it was part time, and I'm full time guarantee. So wasn't an applicable placement. Nothing further came. Nothing in the policy/ ies for this scenario. Most cant get their head around what to do. The Union should, but for some reason don't (even when presented with direct subsections). I sent these clear black and white clauses to the CEO. They replied citing the policy of the wrong year. Shit show from top to bottom. But its another evidence piece. When I send them to HR, there is no response. Speaking to them verbally it's "I don't know how that department did that, but we can only control this part here".
          So had enough. Time for someone to make them give an answer. Also considering taking it to the media so that no one else enters this 14 year process for no reason, and secondly the public know that there are people working in the public sector with zero training or knowledge in their field.

          • 0
  • weezlebub on 07/05/2026 - 11:23

    Back to possible outcomes, maybe re-raise and escalate the matter with WorkCover?

    They are the insurer and your employer has a duty to listen to the recommendations of WorkCover.

    If you employer refuses to follow the WorkCover directions, you could possibly look at raising another WorkCover claim, saying that your employers failure to follow the guidance of WorkCover has lead to additional injury and difficulties as a new and separate claim.

    • 0
    • tunzafun001 on 07/05/2026 - 14:44

      Any legislation/ documentation that backs that up?

      My employers interpretation is that work cover is simply giving "suggestions and recommendations". Non of which are enforceable.

      • 0
  • stuffandthat on 07/05/2026 - 16:55

    Mate, we just want bargains.

    • 0
Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join