Street cleaner breaks his silence after being sacked for objecting to an Acknowledgment of Country
Melbourne man Shaun Turner, 60, was sacked from his role as a street sweeper for Darebin City Council in June 2024 after he questioned the ceremony at a toolbox meeting.
The council worker, whose father served in World War II, told the meeting: 'If you need to be thanking anyone, it's the people who have worn the uniform and fought for our country to keep us free.'
'It's getting out of hand and people are losing it, it is now being done at the opening of a postage stamp.'
Council officers investigated Mr Turner's alleged 'serious misconduct' but the father-of-three doubled down and he was let go.
'As far as I know half of us are born here, I don't need to be welcomed to my own country. If people don't want to be there, they can leave,' Mr Turner told the officers.
Mr Turner also told officers that Acknowledgement of Country should be reserved for more formal or international occasions.
The Fair Work Commission upheld his unfair dismissal claim, with Mr Turner believing his legal win resonated with the 'silent majority' of people in Australia.
Mr Turner, who voted Liberal at the recent election, said 'of course' the country had become too politically correct.
'I just feel like if you were a pale, stale male you can't go to work now and have a laugh,' Mr Turner told The Australian.
'If me and you are having a laugh over here, and he (a third person) takes it to management, well, next minute we're getting a warning for not being inclusive.'
Mr Turner explained he holds 'centre right' views and dislikes both Anthony Albanese and Dan Andrews.
He added the workplace was being overrun by 'programmed robots', with everyone having to be careful with what they say.
Fair Work Commission Deputy President Richard Clancy ruled in favour of Mr Turner labelling his dismissal as 'harsh' and 'disproportionate'.
The commission is set to hold a hearing to consider Mr Turner's request for reinstatement and to determine the remedy for the unfair dismissal.
Mr Turner said he would not speak about the details of his case as the commission was deliberating, however he wanted it known that his actions were not racially motivated.
'When it comes to this, the first thing that happens is you are labelled racist. I may not like a lot of people but I have no problem with Aboriginal people,' Mr Turner said.
'I played football, I was brought up with people of all races in Broadmeadows. Some you get on with, some you don't. The easy thing to throw around these days if you can't win an argument is to call someone racist.'
Mr Turner believes Acknowledgement of Country is unsuitable for small meetings and should rather be reserved for large events attended by international visitors.
Before Mr Turner was dismissed, he attended another meeting with Council Chief of People Officer Yvette Fuller.
Ms Fuller informed Mr Turner that there was a firm expectation for an Acknowledgment of Country to precede all formal meetings.
Mr Turner questioned: 'Why didn't we do it in this meeting then?,' to which Ms Fuller then asked: 'Are you saying you will continue to disrupt an Acknowledgement of Country?'.
'I won't disrupt it but I want to be asked if I would like you to give me the courtesy to step outside,' he replied.
In his termination letter, Darebin City Council alleged during the May 21, 2024 meeting that Mr Turner had said 'the Acknowledgment of Country is not necessary'.
The council further alleged Mr Turner said Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 'do not deserve an acknowledgment at the start of meetings'.
But Fair Work Commission's Deputy President Richard Clancy found Mr Turner's statements were not delivered in the manner or tone alleged by the council.
'I am not persuaded that Mr Turner said either 'The Acknowledgment of Country is not necessary' or that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 'do not deserve an acknowledgment at the start of meetings',' Mr Clancy said.
'I am satisfied, however, that Mr Turner made a comment to the effect that if anyone was to be acknowledged or thanked at a toolbox meeting, it should be the servicemen and women who had fought for this country (i.e. Australia) but I do not consider that expressing such an opinion constitutes a valid reason for dismissal.'
Mr Clancy said the Acknowledgement of Country would have caught the members of the street cleaning team off guard.
He added Mr Turner's specific question 'are you joking?' and his reference to the 'opening of a postage stamp' was the articulation of a reaction of surprise.
'I regard Mr Turner's various comments as having been a spontaneous expression of his opinion that Acknowledgements of Country are appropriate on special occasions but one was not necessary at the toolbox meeting,' Mr Clancy said.
'His comments were laced with his underlying frustration in relation to the various issues pertaining to his work.
'I have not been persuaded these particular comments of Mr Turner either rise to the level of having been disrespectful and aggressive in tone, or that they were perceived by anyone to be so.'
Mr Clancy labelled Mr Turner's dismissal as 'harsh' and 'disproportionate' to the context within which his comments were made.
'I reiterate that even if the reasons for the dismissal relating to the comments about Acknowledgements of Country and Mr Turner's colleague were regarded as valid, the dismissal was harsh,' Mr Clancy said.
'It was disproportionate having regard to the context within which his comments were made and Mr Turner's circumstances.'
The Council's submissions indicated that it took particular offence to Mr Turner's use of the word 'courtesy' when asked if he would be given the option to 'step outside' during an Acknowledgement of Country.
Council said the use of the word 'displayed contempt to the council's Indigenous employees and community'.
But Mr Clancy disagreed with the council's assessment.
'That Mr Turner holds a different point of view when it comes to Acknowledgements of Country does not, of itself, make him contemptuous of the Respondents.'
Mr Clancy noted that both Ms Fuller and Elizabeth Skinner, who was the city works manager at the time, were sufficiently concerned by Mr Turner's conduct that they each contacted his Indigenous support person after the meeting to offer an apology.
However, during the Fair Work proceedings, there was no evidence given to show the support person felt offended.
In his testimony for the Fair Work claim, Mr Turner said he believed he was 'being made out to be a racist'.
'I've got to say that I was brought up on Broadmeadows. I come from a family of eight,' he said.
'My best friends out at Broadmeadows happen to be Aboriginal [people], one of them marrying my sister. I have a niece and great-niece and nephews who are all Aboriginal.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Why are some Australian farmers losing faith in peak agricultural bodies to represent their interests?
Last September, a leaked email revealed the National Farmers' Federation had directed members to stay silent about the putative health risks from paraquat, a widely used herbicide. Some farmers rebelled. Among them was Mirboo North grower and grazier Emma Germano, who was then the president of the Victorian Farmers Federation. Germano broke ranks with the NFF to support the farmers who'd been vilified for speaking out about clusters of Parkinson's disease, which they believed to be linked to paraquat use on farms. (Manufacturer Syngenta, which has partnerships with NFF, denies any link.) 'These people are suffering,' Germano told the ABC's AM program. 'They're asking a question. For that to be shut down, when these are people who have been diligently part of our industry, salt-of-the-earth farmers – that, to me, is inexcusable.' Germano's stance revealed a growing discontent with peak bodies in Australia's fragmented agriculture sector. Some farmers believe peak bodies advocate for agribusiness interests over those of grassroots farmers. In niche and nascent sectors especially, farmers say they don't feel represented by Australia's 50 farming organisations, which range from regulators and statutory bodies to commodity groups, industry associations and farmers federations. The latter have faced declining memberships for decades. Andrew Meseha, whose companies grow hemp in Deniliquin, Shepparton and South Gippsland, says farm bodies cannot advocate for farmers while sponsored by corporations and aligned with specific political parties. 'The chemical companies are in every pocket,' he says. Meseha believes consequent farmer discontent accounts for the rising influence of independent rural MPs and the advent of non-partisan, issue-based collectives such as Lock the Gate and Farmers for Climate Action (FCA). Sign up to receive Guardian Australia's fortnightly Rural Network email newsletter Founded in 2010, Lock the Gate says it has 120,000 supporters, and decade-old FCA claims it has 45,000 supporters and more than 8,400 members. By comparison, state federations and associations – some more than a century old with huge legacy capital – report membership bases from about 3,500 in Western Australia and about 19,000 in New South Wales. The NFF accepts only organisational members – a structure Germano says privileges 'special interests, factions and commodity groups', and generates 'a huge amount of overlap' with state federations. 'It's a pyramid scheme without the Tupperware,' she says. The NFF president, David Jochinke, who was previously the president of the VFF, says the structure of agricultural organisations has been 'a topic of discussion for decades' and should continue to be so 'to make sure we have the best system to ensure agriculture and farmers are heard'. 'We recognise that the agricultural landscape is changing, and with it the expectations of how peak bodies engage, advocate and represent grassroots voices,' he says. This week, the NFF chief executive, Troy Williams, resigned after three months in the job, citing 'personal reasons'. Consumed with infighting, the VFF lost about 400 members in the year before the paraquat showdown – partly attributable to corporatisation and mergers of farms. Farm sizes have swelled, meaning fewer individual farmers to represent, with the number of Australian broadacre and dairy farms declining by a third in the last 25 years. Increasing automation has also reduced the sector's workforce – a dragnet of occupations that includes pickers and processors, as well as fishing and forestry labourers – to only 2.1% of Australia's working population, represented largely by unions, not peak farm bodies. Farmers – a famously individualistic sector – don't tend to collectively organise in union style. But first-generation farmers are increasingly looking to 'collective action solutions that peak bodies could embrace', says horticulturist and 'agvocate' Lisa Brassington. These bodies could 'depoliticise the messages and reach out to the commons', she says. Politicking by farm bodies can stoke populist myths about urban-rural divides, with the 'latte line' and 'quinoa belt' rhetoric sometimes deployed, but Brassington says fire and flood relief donors are largely 'from urban and township postcodes', showing broad solidarity and goodwill. 'Natural and financial crises create a loss of autonomy' for farmers and peak bodies 'have a time-sensitive role' to support 'collective interests', she says. Claiming to amplify the voices of farmers, aspiring social media influencers such as FOALS (Future of Agricultural Leadership) are emerging. Agricultural influencers are also a growth industry. But many influencers reiterate divisive messaging and can't effectively advocate because they don't have the established bodies' governance structures and transparency obligations, says Brassington. Furthermore, issues for farmers remain mostly 'similar to previous generations – drought, flood, roads, labour, supply chains, and profit margins', alongside 'succession planning, affording technology and water rights' and mental health. Much advocacy for the latter is carried by charities such as Farm Angels and Rural Doctors Foundation, and university research outfits such as AgHealth. Sign up to The Rural Network Subscribe to Calla Wahlquist's fortnightly update on Australian rural and regional affairs after newsletter promotion Germano believes farm bodies need to modernise and reform their profligate cultures if they want to retain grassroots members. 'Peak state organisations mirror National party branches from long ago, when they served men from the landed gentry,' she says. A third of Australia's farmers are now women, yet women 'can't step outside the status quo' inside federations, she says. 'They're still old boys' clubs.' Jochinke says the NFF's national advocacy model is 'proudly member-driven and we are actively working with our member organisations to shape a modernised, effective approach'. Germano led the VFF's split from the NFF in September, after the NFF didn't consult with Victorian sheep farmers before staging a Coalition-partnered Canberra rally against the phase-out of live exports. She believes such tactics are undemocratic and outdated – promoting myths that farmers are indifferent to animal welfare and 'that the big war is against animal activists'. 'The live sheep ban was advocated most strongly by meatworkers unions who wanted meat locally processed,' she says. Negotiating with diverse interest groups achieves better policy outcomes for farmers and the broader community. To advocate effectively, farm bodies need 'better governance, independence and listening – discipline, culture, restructure', says Germano. 'They need to ask: do we stand for farmers or do we stand for agribusiness? These are different things and are often at cross purposes.' Jochinke says the NFF 'reject the notion that peak bodies prioritise agribusiness over grassroots concerns'. 'Our recent work, such as opposing the biosecurity levy, securing bipartisan support for a national food security plan, and advocating for fair environmental and tax policies, demonstrates our commitment to representing the interests of everyday farmers.' Katherine Wilson is a writer and freelance journalist from the Yarra Ranges in Victoria Sign up for the Rural Network email newsletter
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
NSW supreme court rules in favour of pro-Palestine march across Sydney Harbour Bridge
Pro-Palestinian protesters will be legally protected while marching across the Sydney Harbour Bridge on Sunday after a New South Wales supreme court decision. The Palestine Action Group has claimed as many as 50,000 people will take part in the march across the iconic bridge, protesting against Israel's conduct in Gaza and the starvation of children. Earlier this week, police rejected an application from organisers for it to facilitate the march. Police argued there was not enough time to prepare a traffic management plan and warned of a potential crowd crush and huge disruptions. Once the application, known as 'a form 1' was rejected by police, the supreme court was required to decide whether the protest should be considered as 'authorised', which provides some legal protections to demonstrators. The court ruling means protesters will have immunity from being charged under the summary offences act. This includes protection from offences like 'obstructing' traffic – crucial in this particular protest. However, police will still have access to a range of other powers to stem so-called 'anti-social behaviour' or other types of offending. This includes showing prohibited symbols. David Mejia-Canales, a senior lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre, said the authorisation 'doesn't give people the ability to engage in all types and all forms of activism'. 'It's really important for people who do attend that they follow the directions of organisers and marshals.' There is no authority to ban protest or deem it unlawful in NSW. This is because while there is no express right to protest in the state, it is covered in common law and by the Australian constitution, which the high court has found implies the right to freedom of political communication. The Palestinian Action Group's lawyer, Felicity Graham, told the court on Friday that organisers would proceed with the demonstration regardless of the decision. 'I have the firmest of instructions that Palestine Action Group are proceeding with this protest … it cannot be stopped,' Graham said. Graham said her argument was not to threaten the court, but to point out 'the police have no choice' and there was no evidence prohibiting the protest would increase public safety. 'The intention to march, irrespective of an immunity, is grounded in a belief that the situation is one of profound moral urgency and that the time is now,' she said. A spokesperson for the group, Josh Lees, said they were willing to delay protest by up to three weeks if the police were willing to work with them. The police's barrister Lachlan Gyles argued that what was being asked was 'unprecedented' in terms of the 'risk, the lack of time to prepare, and, of course, the location, which is one of the main arteries in one of the largest cities in the world'. 'There's been no liaison whatsoever with any of the agencies and government authorities who would be involved, most particularly Transport for New South Wales,' he said. The decision came after several NSW Labor MPs defied their premier, Chris Minns, by vowing to attend the march. Labor's Stephen Lawrence, Anthony D'Adam, Lynda Voltz, Cameron Murphy and Sarah Kaine were among 15 NSW politicians who signed an open letter on Thursday evening calling on the government to facilitate 'a safe and orderly event' on Sunday
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
Victorians could soon have the right to work from home two days a week under Australian-first laws
Victorians could soon have a legal right to work from home two days a week, under proposed Australian-first laws to be introduced to parliament by the state Labor government in 2026. The Victorian premier, Jacinta Allan, will use Labor's state conference on Saturday to announce the proposal, which, if passed by parliament, would make the state the first in the country to legislate the right to work remotely. Allan will tell party faithful if a job can reasonably be done from home, employees would have the legal right to do so for at least two days a week. The law would apply to both public and private sector workers, though how it would be enforced and other specifics were not outlined ahead of her speech. In a statement, the premier said that working from home was popular, it saved families money, cut congestion and allowed greater workforce participation, particularly among women with children, carers and people with a disability. Sign up: AU Breaking News email 'Work from home works for families and it's good for the economy,' Allan said. 'Not everyone can work from home, but everyone can benefit.' The announcement sets the stage for a political fight in the lead-up to the November 2026 state election, given the Coalition opposition has previously signalled plans to return the public service to the office full-time. The shadow treasurer, James Newbury, told the Herald Sun in February that the government 'should be requiring public servants to work from the office' but stopped short of confirming whether the Coalition would enforce a mandate. The issue was also a flashpoint at the recent federal election, with Peter Dutton forced mid-campaign to reverse a policy to restrict work from home arrangements for public servants due to public backlash. Allan's statement said consultation on the legislation would be led by the Department of Premier and Cabinet and would cover the types of businesses and the size of businesses that would be included, as well as the definition of remote work and who was able to do it. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion It stressed the consultation process 'won't determine whether working from home should be a right' as that position had already been decided. Instead, it would focus on 'the appropriate laws to reflect it'. It said 'several legislative options were available'. Allan will be left to rally the room of 600 Victorian Labor delegates, with the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, unable to attend as he will be at the Garma festival in the Northern Territory. It will mean the deputy prime minister, Richard Marles, will be the most senior party figure at the two-day event and placed in an uncomfortable position as delegates vote on a review of the Aukus submarine deal he has strongly backed. Other urgency resolutions up for debate include a call for the federal government to immediately recognise a Palestinian state and impose sanctions on Israel, rejection of the Allan government's proposed protest laws – described as 'anti-democratic and regressive' – and for all 44 public housing tower sites slated for redevelopment to remain in public hands.
