Key Points
- Ms Rugg sought to keep her job after suing Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth over alleged unreasonable work expectations.
- A judge ruled that it’s "unreasonable" for Ms Rugg to continue working for the MP.
- The parties are set to decide on a timeline for the trial and meet for a case management hearing in the coming weeks.
It would be "wholly unreasonable" to order independent MP Monique Ryan to continue working with the staffer who is suing her, a judge has said.
Sally Rugg had applied for an urgent court injunction to stop Dr Ryan from ending her employment as chief of staff, after she alleged she was pushed into resigning.
Ms Rugg wanted to continue working for the federal MP for Kooyong as an advisor, undertaking policy and media work, while she pursued an unfair dismissal claim against Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth.
According to court documents, Dr Ryan gave a formal warning to Ms Rugg after she boarded a flight while infected with COVID-19 in November last year.
Dr Ryan, a former paediatric neurologist and a staunch advocate for stricter COVID-19 rules, said Ms Rugg getting on the plane while infected was "wilfully selfish" and had eroded her trust in her chief of staff.
Unfair dismissal claim and 'robust' negotiations
Dr Ryan hired Sally Rugg, a former Change.org head, last year following her successful challenge to then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg's seat of Kooyong in the federal election.
Ms Rugg has alleged she was unfairly dismissed after being asked to work "unreasonable hours" of more than 70 hours a week, on a salary of $166,000.
Ms Rugg is seeking compensation and pecuniary penalties from both parties, and has added serious contraventions of the Fair Work Act against the Commonwealth to her dispute.
Both parties were unable to resolve the unfair dismissal claim following "robust" private negotiations, the Federal Court in Melbourne was told on 17 February.
Dr Ryan hired Sally Rugg, a former Change.org head, last year following her successful challenge to then-treasurer Josh Frydenberg's seat of Kooyong in the federal election. Source: AAP / Joel Carrett
Commonwealth barrister Nicholas Harrington said, "There was a robust exchange of views at that mediation, as often happens, and there was a lot to think about as a consequence.
"After about four hours the mediation ended and it was unsuccessful."
Where do they go from here?
Justice Debra Mortimer found there was no "prospect whatsoever of a cooperative relationship being restored" between the pair.
"It is not rational to contend that Dr Ryan can, or should be able to, put all this to one side and resume a constructive working relationship with Ms Rugg in what is on the evidence a pressured, extremely busy and demanding working atmosphere, at the best of times," she wrote in her decision.
She said Ms Rugg failed to show the court she had a "powerful desire" to continue working for Dr Ryan.
"That evidence could have been given. Ms Rugg has not given that evidence. She has given a lot of evidence about her own ambitions, her own desires to be in Canberra," Justice Mortimer wrote.
Even if Ms Rugg had persuaded her she was dedicated to working for the MP, it was "wholly unreasonable to impose such an obligation on Dr Ryan", she said.
"Especially since the working relationship would be resumed while the parties continue to prepare for trial - a trial which, on any view, will be hotly contested and subject to considerable scrutiny," she said.
Justice Mortimer said Ms Rugg's allegations against Dr Ryan were serious and could affect the MP's reputation both personally and professionally.
Justice Mortimer ordered the parties to decide on a timeline for the trial and meet for a case management hearing in the coming weeks.
Test case
Ms Rugg's lawyer Josh Bornstein said the penalty for knowingly and systematically breaching labour standards is up to $660,000.
"The serious contravention claim is made in circumstances in which Dr Ryan publicly acknowledged that her staff were working 70-hour weeks and that it was not safe," he said in a statement last week.
"In addition, the Commonwealth has been on notice of unlawful excessive hours being worked for parliamentary staffers for many years, including by reason of inquiries and reports to parliament."
Mr Bornstein said the social activist's case would be a test of what constitutes "reasonable" overtime or additional hours for parliamentary staffers and could have wider implications if successful.
"If Ms Rugg's case succeeds, it will open the door for further litigation including class actions, not just for employees of the Commonwealth but for every Australian worker experiencing exploitation because of a contractual obligation to perform undefined 'reasonable additional hours'," he said.
Staffing allocations for independent and minor party MPs were cut by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in June last year. The crossbench MPs were allowed to employ one advisor as part of their staffing allocation in the new parliamentary term, down from two advisors and two assistant advisors.
In a statement, Dr Ryan said the additional claims are rejected and will be defended, but as the matter is before the court, no further comment will be made.
