The ongoing employment conflict involving Richard Marles and his chief of staff, Jo Tarnawsky, has sparked concerns regarding the autonomy of the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service. This concern arose when a legal letter was sent to Tarnawsky that included Marles’ perspective.
Upon receiving a letter from Tarnawsky’s lawyer on June 24, Deputy Prime Minister Marles sought advice from the PWSS, which then enlisted Ashurst, a prominent law firm based in Sydney.
In her letter dated June 24, Tarnawsky’s lawyer outlined her claims of exercising workplace rights and experiencing adverse actions after attempting to address staff misconduct. Instead of protection, she alleged being advised to seek alternative employment.
Two days later on June 26, Ashurst responded on behalf of PWSS stating their engagement by the commonwealth to represent them.
The legal correspondence from PWSS informed Tarnawsky that Marles disputed her version of events.
Subsequently, Tarnawsky sought representation from Michael Bradley at Marque Lawyers. Bradley expressed concerns about the perceived lack of independence within PWSS given its involvement in presenting an employer’s stance alongside mediating disputes.
Sussan Ley says Richard Marles should resign if he failed to provide safe workplace for chief of staffRead more
Bradley stated on behalf of his client that there appears to be a blurred line between PWSS and the deputy prime minister from their perspective. They feel isolated in this situation.
2024-10-14 22:45:53
Original source www.theguardian.com
