Response to CSIRO allegations of dodgy claims in Senate Estimates

Posted on February 19, 2013. Filed under: Uncategorized |

In response to CSIRO statements made during Senate Estimates on 13th of February 2013 Victims Of CSIRO wish to categorically state that

  1. Victims Of CSIRO have never received any requests from anyone asking for their name to be removed.
  2. Victims Of CSIRO have never received any contact from CSIRO Legal nor from any law firm representing CSIRO.
  3. Victims of CSIRO have never sought in anyway way to interfere with proper judicial  or administrative processes.

Victims of CSIRO will continue to fulfill its mission to expose the toxic workplace culture within the CSIRO and the culpability of its senior leadership.

As we have done so previously, we will publish all information presented to us in relation to this subject, including those views that differ from our own.

The following article was posted in the Canberra Times.  We have also included the comments made by members of the general public in response to this article.  Judge for yourself!

CSIRO bully accusations ‘dodgy’, says executive

Date
February 20, 2013

Noel Towell

The CSIRO facility on Limestone Avenue.The CSIRO facility on Limestone Avenue. Photo: Andrew Sheargold

Some of the bullying and harassment claims from within the CSIRO are ”pretty dodgy”, according to a senior executive.

As the CSIRO announced details of its independent review of its workplace culture, Commonwealth parliamentarians have been told to treat with caution some of the claims made by former employees.

CSIRO chief executive Megan Clark told staff on Monday that the review would be led by former Commonwealth ombudsman and emeritus professor Dennis Pearce, one of Australia’s leading experts on administrative law.

The organisation has been dogged for several years by claims of bullying and harassment, one group of alleged victims garnering considerable publicity and setting up victimsofcsiro.com to pursue their cause.

But CSIRO deputy chief executive of operations Mike Whelan told a Senate estimates committee in Canberra last week that some of the claims that had attracted publicity were suspect.

”Lots of allegations have been tossed around by stakeholders and media in recent times and I would have to say that the basis for some of those are pretty dodgy,” he said.

”Over the last three years, to October 2012, there have been 11 allegations of bullying and harassment made in the CSIRO and 10 of those have subsequently not been substantiated.”

Mr Whelan was also critical of the claims made on the site.

”There are entries on that website that purport to detail the case studies of at least 14 victims of CSIRO and I know for a fact that two of the individuals cited there have indicated to CSIRO that they are not victims, that they have not supported the material being put on that website and that they are uncomfortable about being associated with this,” he said.

In her bulletin to the organisation’s 6600 workers, Dr Clark said the CSIRO installation at Black Mountain in Canberra was now fully compliant with the ”improvement notice” handed out by Commonwealth workplace safety authority Comcare last year.

”Misconduct procedures have been updated to include a health risk assessment, amendments have been made to reflect changes to the medical assessment process and we’ve updated our reporting and recording mechanisms,” she wrote.

”We also have guidelines for the governance of complex cases.”

Of the two-stage review, Dr Clark said: ”Professor Pearce will investigate claims of former staff of bullying and harassment within the organisation … The investigation team will first seek submissions with the aim of providing an interim report by May 2013.

”We envisage that this report will cover the number and nature of claims made … It may also contain recommendations on matters that require further examination.

”This will occur in phase two of the review, which may take a further six months or more depending on the number of matters.”

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/csiro-bully-accusations-dodgy-says-executive-20130219-2epx0.html#ixzz2LOJsrikS

4 comments so far

  • If Comcare gave CSIRO an ‘improvement notice’ it is because the employees (through their lawyer) have won their legal case for bullying and harassment and have sufficient evidence that they were subjected to unfair and unreasonable practices and their health was damaged as a result. Dodgy claims for that sort of thing don’t get through Comcare’s detailed scrutiny. So CSIRO investigate 11 claims of bulling and harassment internally and 10 have not been substantiated. Just goes to show how flawed and unreliable CSIRO’s internal investigations are. They clear themselves of any wrong-doing through internal investigations to try to avoid liability for any subsequent claim for damages, then claim to the media that they are ‘dodgy’ claims to make the organisation look better publicly. Yet CSIRO have updated their processes at Comcare’s instructions? You would have to be a fool to think that ‘unfair and unreasonable’ processes are unlikely to result in bullying and harassment and cause damage to an employee. Clearly CSIRO are trying to reduce the impression and effect of the term “bullying and harassment” by stating they were just flawed processes (ie. trivial).

    Commenter
    Felix
    Location
    ACT
    Date and time
    February 20, 2013, 9:08AM
  • It is near impossible to get Comcare compensation for psychological injuries. These sort of claims end up in Tribunal because employers like CSIRO misrepresent their actions, withhold evidence and drag the process out. Comcare is more than happy to listen to the employer hoping the claimant will give up. For Comcare to actually investigate the workplace AND find breached of health and safety legislation is very rare. Imposing Notice of Improvement is almost unheard of. Yet CSIRO got 2 notices in 2012 and their Comcare premium skyrocketed. Surely it must mean something!

    Commenter
    The truth about Comcare and CSIRO
    Date and time
    February 20, 2013, 10:14AM
  • Maybe it is the internal CSIRO grievance processes which are ‘dodgy’?

    Commenter
    Trusted advisor
    Date and time
    February 20, 2013, 10:18AM
  • If management’s response is anything other than to be happy to face external scrutiny to clear things up, they probably have something to hide. To attack serious claims by calling them “dodgy”, even if they turn out to be so, makes me suspicious of the CSIRO management culture and adds credence to the claims of a toxic culture.

    Commenter
    Sceptic
    Date and time
    February 20, 2013, 10:22AM

 

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: