Independent MP Monique Ryan gave her chief-of-staff Sally Rugg a formal warning after she boarded a flight back to Melbourne while sick with COVID, a court has heard.
Dr Ryan believed Ms Rugg should not have boarded the plane and had put passengers at risk, an affidavit submitted to the Federal Court has revealed.
On Friday, the Federal Court in Melbourne heard that Ms Rugg tested positive to the virus in November while working with Dr Ryan in Canberra. She returned to Melbourne, with her lawyers telling the court she had received doctor’s advice to “return home” after the positive test.
Justice Debra Mortimer said this advice did not recommend getting on a flight.
“You can’t hide from that,” Justice Mortimer said. “There is no letter [advising Ms Rugg to board a flight].”
In her own affidavit, Dr Ryan said she took the incident very seriously and did not believe any doctor would advise a person with COVID to board a flight.
“Ms Rugg did not accept the seriousness of what she had done,” Dr Ryan’s affidavit said.
After the incident, Ms Rugg took a period of stress leave.
She appeared in the Federal Court on Friday for an urgent application asking the court to prevent her job from being terminated.
Dr Ryan says Ms Rugg resigned from the position of her own volition. However, the staffer’s lawyer told the court she was pushed or jostled into resigning.
She launched an unfair dismissal claim against Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth in January, claiming she was threatened with being sacked for refusing to work unreasonable hours.
Details of those allegations, including claims of hostility in the workplace, were aired in court and documents – including the COVID warning – released to the public for the first time on Friday.
Ms Rugg alleged in court documents she would work between 70 and 80 hours a week for Dr Ryan, including working both days across the weekend, writing speeches and other tasks.
She claimed Dr Ryan asked her to work more than that by performing community engagement work, including managing volunteers, projects and events in the MP’s Kooyong electorate.
Dr Ryan’s tone and facial expressions were angry when issues were raised about Ms Rugg not fulfilling some duties due to the alleged high workload, Ms Rugg said in an affidavit.
The MP is fighting the case and has rejected Ms Rugg’s claims about hostility and tension in the workplace.
Ms Rugg’s lawyer, Angel Aleksov, said his client was employed as an adviser, not specifically as chief-of-staff, and was paid $136,000 a year plus $30,000 in parliamentary allowances.
“Ms Rugg was plainly saying, I can’t do this community engagement work. Dr Ryan said ‘no I need you to work harder,'” he told the court.
“Ordinary human experience tells us a salary of $130,000-ish with top-up of $30,000 does not justify someone working 70-plus hours a week, week in, week out.
“This has test case written all over it.”
He said Ms Rugg was willing to return to work as an adviser for Dr Ryan, undertaking policy and media work, as the dispute continued through the courts.
However, Justice Mortimer said this might be unworkable, given the personal working relationship MPs had with staff.
“It does seem to me what the applicant is inviting is for the court to supervise or it’s simply unworkable,” she said.
The hearing continues.
– with AAP
