SOME of the claims in a lawsuit brought by former Integrity Commission chief Barbara Etter did not amount to "a hill of beans", the Supreme Court was told today.
The former West Australian assistant police commissioner is suing the State Government after she unexpectedly quit her $173,000-a-year job in October last year, just one year into her five-year contract as the inaugural CEO of the state's Integrity Commission.
Ms Etter claims the State Government repudiated her employment contract when it failed to address the stress and anxiety caused by the role, failed to bring perceived performance issues to her attention in a timely fashion, undermined her ability to do her job, and encouraged Integrity Commission employees to reject her authority.
The State Government's lawyer Frank Neasey today opposed sections of a revised statement of claim lodged on Ms Etter's behalf.
He told the Supreme Court in Hobart that some of the claims of poor working relationships within the commission could not support a finding against the state, because there was no evidence they were authorised or carried out on behalf of the state or were a breach of her employment contract.
"It is one thing for a workplace to deteriorate to such an extent where it is difficult or impossible to work in it happily. It is quite a different thing to say that from such a state of affairs the defendant -- the State of Tasmania -- has repudiated her contract of employment.
"None of the paragraphs singularly or collectively constitute a base on which it can be said that the state repudiated the plaintiff's contract of employment.
"The fundamental problem is that they don't amount to a hill of beans."
Ms Etter's lawyer Daniel Zeeman said the statement of claim was intended to show a pattern of behaviour which left Ms Etter unable to continue in her role.
But Mr Neasey said the allegations should not be allowed to stand because they were vexatious, frivolous, would waste court time and were oppressive, prejudicial and embarrassing to the defendant.
Mr Neasey said some of Ms Etter's claims -- such as having her name wiped off a whiteboard which detailed commission staff -- were insignificant.
"They can all be met with the same response, and that is: 'So what?'," he said.
"At best all they do on one view -- if they are proven to be true -- is to show that the Integrity Commission wasn't a very happy place to work for the plaintiff; in fact, it was a horrible place.
"So what if her name was rubbed off a whiteboard? We don't know when, we don't know why and we don't know who did it.
"It is simply a meaningless and vacuous allegation."
The case has been adjourned until a date to be fixed.
david.killick@news.com.au
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
State queries Etter's claims
Dengan url
http://kembangtrotoar.blogspot.com/2012/11/state-queries-etters-claims.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
State queries Etter's claims
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar