The federal court has released new details of Sally Rugg’s case against independent MP Monique Ryan and the commonwealth, including witness statements from Ryan and her chief of staff.
Rugg has sued the commonwealth and Ryan for alleged adverse action after the MP purportedly dismissed her chief of staff from her employment for refusing to work unreasonable additional hours.
From a breakdown in trust over a flight Rugg took when she had Covid, to Ryan’s alleged prime ministerial ambitions, here is what we learned from those court documents.
How much did Rugg work?
Rugg said that she usually worked 70 to 80 hours a week. That included: “both days of the weekend”; 12-hour days in parliamentary sitting weeks; and eight or nine hours in the office on non-sitting days, with very early morning and late nights answering media inquiries, emails and writing briefs.
Ryan said that she disagreed “with any suggestion that I required or expected Ms Rugg to work that number of hours” and “never once” directed her to. Ryan said when parliament was in session “there were weeks” when Rugg worked 70-hour weeks, but her output in non-sitting weeks was not commensurate with that workload.
Notable incidents
Rugg said that:
On 25 September, Ryan was “very angry” and “highly accusatory” that Rugg did not prepare her adequately for sitting weeks.
On 30 September, Ryan said her team had “really dropped the ball on non-Twitter [social media]”, including that nothing had been posted to her Instagram for 10 days. Rugg said that she and Ryan cried at this meeting.
On 12 October, Ryan told The Australian that “I’ve got real concerns about my staff, my chief of staff … [is] working 70 hours a week” – a quote later used without direct reference to Rugg.
On 7 November, Ryan “blamed me when she missed her speaking spot on a pension bill”, claiming Ryan was “furious with me and walked off mid-conversation”.
On 8 November, Rugg said she was “humiliated and embarrassed” when, in front of other Teal MPs, Ryan asked if she had written her speech for the IR bill.
On 9 November, Ryan was “visibly angry at me and did not speak to me about the plan for the day” when Rugg was absent for 10 minutes due to period pain.
Ryan denies any hostile conduct in these and other episodes. Ryan accepts she was “upset” at missing the speaking spot, but denied that she was “furious”.
Rugg: Ryan said she wants to be PM
On 15 November, Rugg claims that Ryan told her:
I don’t think it’s working out … I feel when I ask you to work longer hours or on the weekend, you look at me like you don’t want to and that you feel that I’m taking you away from your family and that I’m a bad person. You are not working hard enough and I need someone who works harder than you.”
At this meeting, Rugg also claims that Ryan said that her political movement was “bigger than Kooyong” and “I want to be the prime minister one day, and I need to know my staff are prepared to work hard for me”.
Rugg flew by plane with Covid
On 22 November, Rugg tested positive for Covid while in Canberra for a parliamentary sitting week.
In her evidence, Ryan said that “later that afternoon, I received a text message from Ms Rugg which said that she was on an aeroplane home, that she could not face the drive or hotel isolation, and that she figured that half the plane could be Covid-positive with or without her on it”.
On 6 December in a meeting at the electorate office, Rugg claims Ryan told her that she was writing her “a formal warning for travelling home when I had Covid, and stated that it had been illegal and a media or brand risk”.
“I said that my GP had told me it was best to isolate at home and that it was not against the law at that time to travel with Covid,” Rugg replied.
Rugg also claims that at this meeting Ryan said, “I don’t think your employment is working out”.
In Ryan’s evidence, she said she believed travelling by plane with Covid was “morally wrong” as well as “a huge reputational issue”.
Ryan said the “sole reason” she gave Rugg a warning was the risk to the public – not the prohibited reason of Rugg exercising a workplace right to refuse unreasonable additional hours.
Stress leave and resignation
Rugg said she went on sick and stress leave from 8 to 16 December, during which she had a performance review in which Ryan offered to re-employ her as a casual or put her on a performance improvement plan. Ryan denies this.
Rugg was put on a performance plan on 20 December.
Rugg claims that on 21 December, Ryan was “sarcastic” in questioning her need for stress leave, and said she was “going to terminate” her employment regardless of the improvement plan. Ryan denies this claim.
Rugg claims Ryan offered for her to resign, pay her six weeks salary and make her sign a non-disparagement contract. Ryan did not dispute this claim.
Rugg said she sent her resignation later on 21 December.
Prospect of employment
In support of her application to retain her job until the final hearing, Rugg submitted that she is “confident that I could continue to work with Dr Ryan”.
Ryan countered that she did “not have the trust and confidence in Ms Rugg’s ability to perform the work that I require her to perform”.
“[Rugg] had the skillset for the role of policy adviser or media adviser, but not chief of staff.”
