High Court may lead to workers comp discrimination: HREOC

High Court may lead to workers comp discrimination: HREOC

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission has noted that the High Court decision in Attorney-General (Vic) v Andrews (2007) HCA 9 upheld workers’ compensation laws allowing large companies to opt out of compulsory state schemes. This decision may have unintended consequences for workers in same-sex relationships according to Human Rights Commissioner Graeme Innes AM.

Under the Commonwealth workers’ compensation scheme, the same-sex partner of an injured or deceased employee is not entitled to workers’ compensation, whereas state workers’ compensation schemes do provide this protection.

“An opposite-sex partner of an employee covered by a federal workers’ compensation scheme has the security of knowing that he or she will be financially supported if his or her partner dies or is injured on the job. A same-sex partner has no such security,” Commissioner Innes said.

“The Comcare system should change to give people in same-sex relationships the same workers’ compensation coverage protecting opposite-sex couples.”

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission is currently finalising the report of the National Inquiry into Discrimination Against People in Same-Sex Relationship regarding Financial and Work-related Entitlements (Same-Sex: Same Entitlements).

The Inquiry covers discrimination against same-sex couples and families in several areas of federal law including:

employment laws (personal and parental leave, workers’ compensation, travel entitlements for federal employees)
tax laws
social security and veterans’ entitlement laws
Medicare and PBS Safety Nets
superannuation laws, and
aged care laws.

Link to HREOC

Decision in Attorney-General (Vic) v. Andrews

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Can I Move Away With My Child? Relocation Law in Australia

Relocation cases sit among the most difficult parenting disputes in Australian family law. They usually arise when one parent wants to move with a child, or has already moved, in a way that reduces the other parent’s time or involvement. That move might be to another suburb, another regional town, another state, or overseas. These… Read More »Can I Move Away With My Child? Relocation Law in Australia

Who is a Parent By Stephen Page

The question sounds simple. Who is a parent? In law, it is anything but simple. Biology matters. Birth matters. Intention matters. Paperwork matters. State law matters. Federal law matters. Sometimes they line up neatly. Sometimes they collide in ways that leave families, lawyers and government departments wrestling with very uncomfortable uncertainty. That is especially true… Read More »Who is a Parent By Stephen Page

Posthumous Conception in Victoria: Retrieval, Consent, and the Law

Posthumous conception cases in Victoria sit at the intersection of grief, medicine, and strict statutory rules. They are deeply personal matters, but they are also highly technical. Timing matters. Consent matters. Process matters. And one of the hardest truths for families is that retrieving eggs, sperm, or embryos is often easier than being legally allowed… Read More »Posthumous Conception in Victoria: Retrieval, Consent, and the Law

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board