Submissions to Coroner Lock – Inquest into the death of Gavin Lyle Woods
It is beyond doubt that Queensland Department of Education staff are still suffering the psychological scars of workplace bullying. I am concerned about the welfare of staff, particularly those that may have mental health issues that they may become targeted and I sincerely believe that the systems, processes and practices cater to managing employees rather than preventing and dealing with workplace bullying authentically.
I submit that your honour has heard enough evidence during this inquest to find that workplace bullying was a significant contributing factor to Gavin’s deterioration of his mental health and ultimate action to end his life.
1) Ms Bradford gave evidence that Gavin would have felt offended, humiliated and intimidated by Mr Constance’s micro-management style towards male staff. Workcover Qld confirmed that Gavin did sustain a psychological injury and that the injury was significantly contributed to by his employment.
2) Ms Gilders gave evidence that during her counselling sessions with Gavin at different times, his symptoms were consistent with a diagnosis of a Major Depressive Disorder and Adjustment Disorder. Further, that in early September that Gavin remained vulnerable to relapse and his symptoms were still significant, resulting in Central Office approving the payment of further counselling sessions.
3) Gavin had an open rehabilitation file from 29 July 2010 – 18 May 2011. He was placed in a host placement, Cairns West S.S. {name withheld} described Gavin as a ‘broken man’ when he started there in October, 2010 E 3.3 p2.
4) Mr Constance and Ms Passi confirmed to discussing Gavin’s competency as a Deputy Principal in April, 2011. {name withheld} from the Ethical Standards Unit stated that he views this type of telephone contact to be unusual and would not endorse it unless it was during the transfer or job application process G16 p58. There is a great deal of dispute as to the details of the conversation but it was agreed that bullying concerns and the workcover claim were shared. They also agreed that Gavin lacked skills to perform the Deputy role, lacked the intellectual capacity and a Managing Under Performance process was appropriate management action.
There is no evidence that either principal shared any concern for Gavin’s emotional well-being or identified any strengths in Gavin’s capacity to improve his performance. Nor was there evidence of contacting {name withheld} or {name withheld} who both had provided a straight “A” reference as to Gavin’s capacity to perform the Deputy Principal role.
Key performance indicators can be used inappropriately, under the guise of performance management, as a bullying technique…are misreported or misrepresented and are presenting a worker as being somehow not measuring up to that which is required when in fact they are.
(4.22, p109 ‘We just want it to stop’ Parliamentary Committee on Workplace Bullying October 2012).
5) Ms Passi, Mr Cook and Mr Collier provided evidence that Ms Passi advised them of her conversation with Mr Constance together with a list of performance issues in relation to Gavin. Ms Passi stated that ‘From his short time at Burpengary State School Mr Woods is already displaying unsatisfactory performance of all five of the Deputy Principals Selection Criteria’. Ms Passi began having concerns regarding Gavin’s performance ‘within a matter of weeks’ and compiled the list after only 10 weeks. The document included comments re: Gavin power tripping, loudness, impetuosity, flirtatious, conning the panel, forgetful, blocking productivity in others, brawling with colleagues, lacking intellectual capacity and having little worthy input.
Ms Ms Mellers and Ms Bradford, deputy principals working closely with Gavin, gave evidence that they did not share these concerns regarding Gavin’s performance, apart from lack of familiarity with the manner in which the new Australian Curriculum had been adapted into Burpengary State School’s established curriculum program and the occasional tardiness to meetings.
TheThere is no evidence that Ms Passi clearly outlined her expectations regarding the ‘Burpengary way’ as part of an induction process e.g. male dress standards for sports day and event proceedings and acceptable level of private internet use prior to official and formal notification.
Threats to professional status using belittling remarks, persistent criticism and inaccurate accusation has been identified as specific bullying behaviours by researchers Moayed et.al (2006, p313) who presented a Model of school workplace bullying
6) Around the time that Ms Passi became aware that Gavin had been placed permanently in her school, two code of conduct issues in relation to Gavin emerged, missing money from a chocolate tin and excessive personal internet use. Initially, Ms Passi claimed that the auditor {name withheld} had advised them of the investigation process they took to address the missing money issue. F1 p1394. Later, that changed to Ms Bunny advised{name withheld} . Despite, {name withheld} having told Ms Bunny that she could have taken the missing money, Ms Bunny concluded that Gavin was the culprit F1 p58. Over a month later, Gavin was officially notified about the missing money and denied natural justice in its investigation. Despite several people having access to the chocolate tin, Gavin was the only staff member to be given an official letter concerning the missing money. Ms Passi claims that Gavin was never actually accused of taking the money but in her interview with {name withheld} when asked about Gavin’s reaction Ms Passi responded that ‘he was, he was defensive but not as defensive as I would have been if someone had accused me of it’ F1 p1397. Any reasonable person would have felt victimised being treated in this manner.
7) After the chocolate tin matter, Ms Passi requested through Ms Bunny that {name withheld}, the IT support person, conduct an internet usage report E 3.9 p5.. Mr Cook and Mr Collier advised Ms Passi that both matters were minor and should be resolved at the lowest level B4 p3. They advised Ms Passi to refer the internet issue to the Department of Education Ethical Standards Unit as a notification of a minor breach for their determination. Ms Passi addressed the internet use with Gavin formally in the same official letter as the chocolate tin issue. Ms Passi advised Gavin that the matter would be forwarded to the ESU and limited Gavin's internet access prior to ESU determination. Gavin responded that he would be more mindful of his internet use in future. Gavin ceased using the internet at school as much as possible. Ms Passi forwarded the matter to the ESU after Gavin went missing. {name withheld} from the ESU assessment explained that it was not approved as it did not meet the thresholds for Code of Conduct Minor Incident Referral.
It was not considered over use or inappropriate use of internet G 16 p34.
The times Gavin was on the internet were insignificant in the context of the work day.
No other staff member received an official letter or referral to the ESU, nor had any staff member had their internet limit restricted in the past. {name withheld} wondered why Ms Passi hadn’t forwarded any of the other high internet users on the list to the ESU. There is no evidence that anyone mentioned to the entire staff or Gavin directly to limit private internet use prior to formal notification. When Ms Passi advised Mr Collier re: the internet issue, he gained the view that Ms Passi was just focussing on Gavin with regard to the excessive internet use G27 p24 The pattern of blowing minor matters out of all proportion to generate a perception of a serious performance issue was identified by {name withheld} F1 p235.
Mr Woodrow gave evidence that Gavin asked for an apology and conveyed in his response letter a strong recommendation to refer the matter to Qld police for investigation and that he absolutely required a written statement exonerating him regarding this false allegation. Any reasonable person would have felt victimised being treated in this manner.
8) By 3 June 2011, Gavin had been notified that he was permanently allocated to Burpengary State School. Mr Woodrow gave evidence that on 3 June 2011 Ms Passi told Gavin ‘off the record’ that it would be likely that he would be placed on a Managing Under Performance process at the commencement of Term 3 and that he needed to go home and think about whether to keep the role G32 p32. Further Ms Passi advised Gavin that in her opinion he lacked the skills to perform the role – that it was too hard for him. Mr Woodrow gave evidence that emotionally, Gavin appeared to ‘hit the wall’ which he reported to Ms Passi. Gavin told Mr Woodrow that he didn’t think he could go through another session like he’d been through up north G32 p28. Mr Woodrow reflected on the meeting and considered that receiving all that information at one time would be intimidating and could have been humiliating. Mr Cook concluded that Ms Passi has chosen strategies that could now be found to be management actions taken in an unreasonable way F5 p8.
Irrespective of form, mode, or context, bullying is characterised by an abuse of power, where vulnerable targets are ‘pushed into positions from which they have no avenue of escape’ (McGrath, submission 87, p3 ‘We just want it to stop’)
9) Two days prior to Gavin’s disappearance, he met with Mr Cook and Mr Evans and he shared with them the statements Ms Passi had made to him G21.3 p116 and options from here.
Statements such as -
“Not a fit for this school, and not wanted at this school”
“You have risen above your level”
"North Qld should have placed you on a MUP and I was angry about having to manage you”
“You have no curriculum experience as you had been in too many schools for short periods. You need to be in the classroom for at least 10 years before being a HOC or Deputy – you aren’t even a Senior Teacher”
“Who told you that you could teach? No one watched you to tell you. There is nowhere to hide these days”
“I can’t trust you to read report cards. These are our public face and I cannot trust that you are able to do this. You will do the fetching and carrying for Lynne while she reads them”
While no witnesses were present to corroborate these statements, Gavin recorded them as being said and the emotional impact of being humiliated and threatened like this would have been exacerbated due to his mental health condition and prior negative experience in FNQ.
I submit that your honour find that the inquest revealed Departmental systemic issues that significantly contributed to the deterioration of Gavin’s mental health and ultimate action to end his life.
1) Mr Cook concluded in his statement that Burpengary State School was ‘not the right school for someone who maybe a bit fragile’ B4 p5.
Ms Owens gave evidence that she would not have placed an emotionally vulnerable staff member in Burpengary State School even if they had strong curriculum skills. There is some dispute regarding what information regarding Gavin’s mental health was provided or accessible when the relocation of Gavin to North Coast region was negotiated.
Mr Rodgers was aware of Gavin’s workcover claim, bullying allegations and return to work plan. Mr Rodgers thought that he had mentioned performance issues and return to work to Ms Owens G29 19-20. Mrs Owens did not recall this information being conveyed to her. At the very least, Ms Owens would have access to Gavin’s Movements / Employment History Report F5 p20 which would show that Gavin took sick leave from 27 July 2010 to 3 October 2010 without a further entry in term 4. Ms Owens confirms that had she asked Mr Rodgers a general question about sick leave or performance issues he would have provided her with the information. Mr Rodgers gave evidence that staff do have electronic TRIM files in which the Ethical Standards referral as a result of the work cover claim would have been accessible to someone at North Coast Regional Office with suitable access clearance.
A recommendation that human resources staff do share general information regarding health and well-being information to enable them to fulfill their duty of care obligations.
This is particularly important within the Department of Education as staff have little to no control over where they are assigned. Often staff are forced transferred so there is a greater responsibility for the Department to ensure that staff are not placed inappropriately.
2) Gavin had an open rehabilitation file from 29 July 2010 – 18 May 2011. Mr Rodgers did not believe that Gavin had performed a true deputy role because he was an additional number at Cairns West State School. Nevertheless the rehabilitation file was not transferred to North Coast region.
A recommendation that rehabilitation officers consult with staff on return to work plans,
principal and human resource officer to determine ongoing support / monitoring needs
recommended at the new center prior to relocation. The information should inform the new region as to best fit location and level of support to ensure a successful transition.
Moving alone involves a high level of stress so it is best to err on the side of the caution.
3) Mr Cook and Mr Collier became aware of the Gavin’s work cover claim and workplace bullying concerns on the 14 April 2011. Mr Cook discussed Gavin with {name withheld} who confirmed the jury was out whether it was a management issue or a performance issue E 4.2 p17. The premise of a work cover claim is that there was some type of work related health issue. No contact was made with Mr Rodgers for more details nor was there any evidence that there was any concern for Gavin’s welfare. Given their knowledge of the “intimidatory work environment” at Burpengary State School as concluded by {name withheld}, Ms Passi’s disciplinary training plan and her views regarding Gavin’s performance, I find this particularly distressing.
A rA recommendation that requires regional office staff to consult with an organisational psychologist regarding case management to ensure the well-being of staff in workplaces identified as exhibiting a culture of workplace bullying would enable regional office staff without mental health training to implement effective proactive and reactive strategies in complex school communities.
It is It is unacceptable to ignore ESU investigation recommendations regarding staff well-being and to simply transfer complainants out of schools without also addressing the underlying source, to protect the remaining staff and those that come into the school in the future.
4) The majority of workcover claims based on workplace bullying are not successful due to the determination of reasonable management action. This determination was made in Gavin’s circumstances without interviewing witnesses. The onus was on Gavin to obtain statements from witnesses at the commencement of the claim to have his sick leave returned to him.
A rA recommendation that all workcover and grievance bullying complaints made orally or provided in writing should be investigated by trained investigators. The conclusions should be forwarded to the Ethical Standards Unit for notification purposes and monitoring. This would prevent years of complaints and psychological suffering through regional office inaction.
5) The grievance process is inherently flawed to address workplace bullying when there is a power imbalance and upon conclusion of this flawed process a supervisory relationship continues. The fear of reprisals, impact on future career opportunities, lack of alternative employment locations available and concern for work colleagues collude to maintain the secrecy of bullying
I I I submit that your honour recommends a Royal Commission be convened to address workplace bullying within the Dept of Education Training and Employment.
T This would enable staff to come forward under the protection of the commission without risk of reprisals or repercussions.
TheThe Royal Commission could provide clear guidelines for school communities on:
· how to prevent workplace bullying
· how to identify and assess the risk of workplace bullying.
· how to control the risk of workplace bullying
· how to consistently implement fair and flexible complaints procedures
· how to encourage reporting
· how to respond to workplace bullying quickly and impartially
· how to resolve bullying using a continuum of strategies from informal to formal
· how to communicate investigation outcomes
· how to provide support to targets
· how to implement specific control measures
· how to monitor and review control measures.
I submit that your honour supports the establishment of a single national advisory service that would provide consistent information to empower targets and support those accused.
Workplace bullying can disturb both the individual and social conceptions of self and value…It can have a profound effect on all aspects of a person’s health as well as their work and family life, undermining self-esteem, productivity and morale. For some it can result in a permanent departure from the labour market and in extreme cases, suicide.(1.3, p2 ‘We just want it to stop’)
Thank you your honour for the opportunity to make submissions verbally in open court so that I might find peace at the end of the day, to having done my up most to advocate on behalf of Gavin, other staff still suffering the psychological scars of workplace bullying and those currently targeted within the Department of Education.
Andrea Malfliet
References:
Moayed, F, A., Daraisch, N., Shell, R., & Salem, S, (2006). Workplace bullying: A systematic review of risk factors and outcomes. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 7(3), 311-327. Taylor and Francis Ltd., <http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals>
Riley, D., Duncan D & Edwards J, (2012). Bullying of Staff in Schools, ACER Press, Vic. Australia
Workplace Bullying “WE JUST WANT IT TO STOP” House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Employment, October 2012- Canberra
Ms Bradford said that the Whitfield State School students really loved Gavin.