A former long time staff member of Paterson MP Meryl Swanson says he was sacked after raising concerns about a worker who he said was paid for days they did not work.
Ms Swanson has rejected the allegation put by her former media advisor James Bartlett, who she fired this week.
Mr Bartlett, who worked for Ms Swanson for almost seven years, was offered a promotion to the role of chief of staff last month.
While familiarising himself with the office's administration, Mr Bartlett said he discovered a discrepancy in the employment arrangements of a worker.
He alleged office records showed the worker had been paid to run a mobile office for Ms Swanson for two days a week over the past 10 months.
However, he said, in his experience, the person only worked about half a day a week in the role.
Mr Bartlett raised the concerns in writing with Ms Swanson on July 19.
"The contracts I've reviewed suggest some anomalies, such as additional workdays not accounted for, which raises the possibility of impropriety or potential fraud," Mr Bartlett wrote.
"It's certainly unsettling, whilst I have decided to decline the chief of staff role in light of some of these concerns and personal views, I feel it's important to ensure you are aware and able to get to the bottom of this appropriately."
He also reported the concerns under whistleblower legislation to the Commonwealth Department of Finance and the newly-established National Anti-Corruption Commission.
A spokesperson for the commission told the Newcastle Herald it did not provide information to third parties about the receipt or status of individual referrals.
The Department of Finance said it did not comment on individual matters involving parliamentarians or their office.
Ms Swanson said on Friday that Mr Bartlett's allegations were false.
"My electorate office and employed staff act completely within the guidelines of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act and Department of Finance," she said.
"The accusations made by a recently terminated employee are completely untrue."
The worker did not respond to questions from the Herald.
Correspondence between Ms Swanson and Mr Bartlett seen by the Herald shows the deterioration of their relationship over recent weeks.
On July 31 Mr Bartlett received a letter titled "Preliminary view on my concerns and proposal to terminate employment".
Ms Swanson told Mr Bartlett she held concerns about his behaviour, actions and judgement.
"I am writing to advise that despite my reasonable attempts to support you, I have lost trust and confidence in you," she wrote.
Ms Swanson alleged that Mr Bartlett sent a text message to the worker in question on June 18 telling them that their employment was no longer tenable.
This, Ms Swanson said, may have constituted bullying and harassment by making disparaging and accusatory comments towards the worker.
A second allegation related to disrespectful behaviour towards Ms Swanson and office colleagues outside a cafe in Thornton on July 8. In a third allegation, Ms Swanson said Mr Bartlett had sent an email to a major stakeholder on July 19 that was considered by the recipient as threatening and misleading.
A fourth allegation said that Mr Bartlett increased his electorate staff allowance on July 21 without authorisation.
"I consider this to be a significant breach of trust and constitutes dishonest and fraudulent behaviour," Ms Swanson wrote.
In his response, sent on August 7, Mr Bartlett said he believed the charges against him were "premeditated" and related to the significant concerns he raised about workplace practices in the electorate office.
He said he sent a text message to the worker in a personal capacity to discuss communication concerns and to express concern about their health. He rejected the accusation that it could be constituted as bullying and harassment.
Mr Bartlett disagreed that his behaviour on July 8 had been disrespectful.
"I raised concerns with you via text message over factually incorrect remarks made by yourself and your chief of staff in front of an audience of Labor Party peers," he said.
"My primary intention was to assist you in avoiding any reputational damage in my capacity as your advisor."
Regarding the email sent to a stakeholder, Mr Bartlett said he had been required to deal with an invoice while Ms Swanson and her chief of staff were away.
He said the stakeholder had previously advised the office that the invoice had been cancelled and he conveyed this in written form to the stakeholder. The invoice was ultimately paid.
Mr Bartlett rejected Ms Swanson's allegation that he increased his staff allowance without authorisation.
"The interim changes were actioned for myself and another staff member, with further changes due to be implemented in August, as per your instruction," he wrote.
"These changes were made before I declined your letter of offer for the position of chief of staff."
In a termination letter sent on Wednesday, Ms Swanson did not refer to Mr Bartlett's allegations relating to workplace practices.
She said she did not have a record of a planning meeting, which Mr Bartlett said took place on June 22, or an approval for Mr Bartlett to increase his Electorate Staff Allowance.
Ms Swanson said her decision to terminate Mr Bartlett's employment was based on her view that his behaviour, judgement and actions may be damaging the trust and confidence that she had of him.
"I have considered your response in full and the matters as you see them. However, in reviewing your response I feel you may not fully recognise the damage done to our working relationship. As such I am unfortunately unable to consider a constructive way forward."
Ms Swanson also undertook to engage with Parliamentary Workplace Services to "get a better understanding of how to strengthen our workplace culture".
Mr Bartlett said he would appeal his termination on the grounds of unfair dismissal.
