The deputy prime minister’s chief of staff, Jo Tarnawsky, is suing her boss and the government, alleging in the federal court that she was punished for raising a bullying complaint and naming a colleague as an alleged perpetrator.
Tarnawsky revealed on Monday that she had begun proceedings for adverse action under the Fair Work Act, naming the commonwealth, her boss Richard Marles and the prime minister’s chief of staff, Tim Gartrell, as respondents. Tarnawsky is not alleging that either Marles or Gartrell bullied her.
The claim alleges Tarnawsky was victimised for having raised the complaint. Her statement to the federal court names a colleague and refers to others unnamed.
The claim outlines what Tarnawsky alleges Marles said when she raised the issue with him on 30 April.
The legal action comes six weeks after Tarnawsky told Guardian Australia that she had allegedly been advised to find another job and effectively locked out of her office since raising a bullying complaint with Marles. She alleged the matter remains unresolved. Technically employed but on indefinite leave, Tarnawsky alleged she was unable to do her job.
She made a public statement that day. Responding in parliament at the time, Marles said Tarnawsky was “a wonderful person” and he felt “deeply sad” about the allegation but because of legal processes he could not comment further.
On Monday, Tarnawsky announced she had commenced legal action, alleging she had been “exiled” and faced “untenable delays” in resolving the matter.
“Like every worker in this country, those who work at Parliament House should be treated professionally, and afforded a safe and respectful workplace,” Tarnawsky told journalists.
“To my fellow staffers: we give countless hours of our lives to these jobs, in support of the ministers and MPs we serve. In return, we should not be tossed aside abruptly after such loyal service. Good exits are possible. It should not be unreasonable for any of us to expect to depart our roles with dignity; to walk away better from our time working in this building, rather than carrying lifelong trauma from the poor treatment we have endured here.”
Tarnawsky’s statement of claim to the court alleges she had been attempting to manage the behaviour on her own but decided to raise it with Marles at the end of a trip to Ukraine in late April.
Tarnawsky alleges in the documents that Marles told Gartrell on 29 April that he “no longer wanted Ms Tarnawsky as his chief of staff”.
“Mr Gartrell did not inform Ms Tarnawsky of the conversation with Mr Marles or intervene to prevent Mr Marles acting in the manner he proposed,” her statement of claim alleges, continuing that Gartrell acted “to assist Mr Marles in preventing Ms Tarnawsky from performing her role”.
Tarnawsky alleges that in a phone conversation on the morning of 30 April, she sought Marles’ help and he responded that he did not think the issue was “fixable”, that there had been “issues” with Tarnawsky for “over a year” and that he wanted to “finish” dealing with it immediately.
The claim alleges Marles told her on 30 April that she was “not stood down” but must take immediate leave from work and look for another job and could “depart with dignity”. It says she agreed to look for another job but “if that was not possible, she would need to return to her role”.
It also alleges he told her she would no longer participate in an official visit to Hawaii, for which they were due to depart the next day.
“The alteration of Ms Tarnawsky’s position was to her prejudice, because it rendered Ms Tarnawsky’s employment uncertain and insecure as a result of Mr Marles’ adverse action and left her with no substantive role to perform,” the claim alleges.
Tarnawsky’s lawyer, Marque Lawyers’ managing partner Michael Bradley, said Tarnawsky would be seeking compensation. He alleged she was “punished … in a state of limbo, frozen out for more than 200 days now”.
The claim seeks compensation for medical expenses, alleged “hurt, distress and humiliation” and reputational damage.
A government spokesperson said the matter was “subject to legal proceedings, and it would not be appropriate to comment further”.
A spokesperson for the prime minister’s office said Gartrell had no comment. Guardian Australia has approached Marles’ office for comment.
