Day four of Antoinette Lattouf’s unlawful termination case continues with ABC managing director David Anderson’s cross-examination.to continue.
Day four of Antoinette Lattouf’s unlawful termination case continues with ABC managing director David Anderson’s cross-examination.to continue.
Hello and welcome back to another live blog for the Antoinette Lattouf v ABC unlawful termination case in the Federal Court.
I’m Calum Jaspan, and I’ve been following this hearing for the past few days. It’s day four and we’ve had a jam-packed week so far.
Today, things are kicking off slightly later at 10.45am and proceedings will run until about 4.30pm.
Lattouf initially took the ABC to the Fair Work Commission over a year ago, after she was sacked three days into a five-day contract, employed as a fill-in presenter on ABC Radio Sydney.
She was sacked after reposting a report from Human Rights Watch on her Instagram account and is claiming, in part, this was due to expressing political opinion and racial discrimination.
The ABC has continued to deny she was sacked or that its most senior executives, including then-chair Ita Buttrose and outgoing managing director David Anderson, were influenced by pro-Israel lobbyists in their decision.
“We don’t have a process of monitoring people’s social media activity. It is occasionally brought to our attention when concerns are raised,” David Anderson said, reaffirming he did not see ABC presenter Paul Barry’s tweets in October about claims that Israel was killing journalists.
“No one’s asked me to look at anything with Mr Barry’s Twitter feed that I can recall … My recollection of complaints about Mr Barry have been mostly contained to the Media Watch program.”
Now barrister Oshie Fagir is going over the examples of ABC presenters Patricia Karvelas and John Lyons and chairman Kim Williams that were brought up yesterday regarding comments the trio had made publicly.
When going over the finer details of the responses required following misconduct in the ABC’s enterprise agreement, ABC managing director David Anderson said he believed Antoinette Lattouf’s conduct warranted an assessment or investigation.
He said his understanding was that Lattouf was not given the opportunity to explain what happened.
“My understanding is the allegations were not put to Ms Lattouf, nor was she invited to respond to any allegations,” Lattouf’s barrister Oshie Fagir said.
“That’s right, that’s my understanding,” Anderson responded.
“Is there some formal process, or is it an ad hoc response each time?” barrister Oshie Fagir asked, trying to press David Anderson on the usual process for deciding how to respond when situations like these arise.
Anderson said that, typically, there is a formal process, which includes the allegations being put to staff, and an investigation ensues.
“That investigation is usually done by, or can be done by, somebody in the employee relations team and People and Culture. Advice is provided to the delegate for the decision, depending on the staff member; it depends where the delegate sits, as far as the decision maker.”
This is the usual process, Anderson said.
“Was the process you’ve just described followed in relation to Ms Lattouf?” Fagir asked Anderson.
“I don’t believe so,” Anderson said.
The court is again hearing questions as to why ABC presenter Laura Tingle was not sanctioned over comments that she made at the Sydney Writers’ Festival last year that Australia is “a racist country”.
Anderson again reaffirmed his view that this was a factual statement.
He said the fact that millions of Australians might not agree with this statement was a consideration, but did not have an impact on the decision when deciding not to sanction her.
Oshie Fagir said the approach Anderson outlined over the decision-making was “completely and utterly arbitrary”.
“I wouldn’t categorise it as arbitrary,” Anderson responded.
We are once again going over the ABC’s codes of conduct and rules over impartiality.
“I think that that is the starting position that you start with, that if somebody is reasonably perceived not to be impartial, then, if that is the case, then it warrants investigation and judgment as to what you then do about it,” David Anderson said.
“Haven’t you gone over this already?” Justice Darryl Rangiah asked.
Antoinette Lattouf’s barrister Oshie Fagir responded by saying yes, but Anderson kept giving qualifications to the statements.
He was using this to return to the examples of presenters Paul Barry, John Lyons and Laura Tingle, as outlined during cross-examination on Wednesday.
ABC managing director David Anderson’s cross-examination has resumed.
Antoinette Lattouf’s barrister Oshie Fagir asked him if working for the ABC is essentially the summit of journalism in Australia.
“Yes, I would say that, but I’m biased,” Anderson said.
“You’d agree that an opportunity to present on the ABC, it’s a very valuable one?”
“Yes,” Anderson agreed.
He then agreed that being taken off-air or removed from an ABC gig was a serious step from an employee’s point of view.
When things kick off at 10.45am, David Anderson’s cross-examination will continue.
The schedule is some way behind, but when that wraps up, the ABC’s outgoing content chief Chris Oliver-Taylor will enter the witness box.
That’s likely to be the extent of what we see today, and Justice Darryl Rangiah flagged yesterday a discussion about the schedule going forward.
Proceedings began on Wednesday with the ABC’s barrister Ian Neil, SC, making the public broadcaster’s opening arguments.
Neil laid out the events from Lattouf’s engagement to her departure in what he described as its accurate chronological order, arguing Lattouf’s team had jumbled it and omitted salient events.
In the afternoon, we saw outgoing ABC managing director David Anderson enter the witness box. Anderson made a number of admissions, including that the process to take Lattouf off-air missed a step, which included seeking the relevant advice from HR.
There were a number of interesting points, including when Anderson agreed with the statement “Australia is a racist country”, which formed part of a line of questioning from Lattouf’s barrister Oshie Fagir, in which he sought to display the ABC’s inconsistent handling of controversial comments made by some of its high-profile stars.
Hello and welcome back to another live blog for the Antoinette Lattouf v ABC unlawful termination case in the Federal Court.
I’m Calum Jaspan, and I’ve been following this hearing for the past few days. It’s day four and we’ve had a jam-packed week so far.
Today, things are kicking off slightly later at 10.45am and proceedings will run until about 4.30pm.
Lattouf initially took the ABC to the Fair Work Commission over a year ago, after she was sacked three days into a five-day contract, employed as a fill-in presenter on ABC Radio Sydney.
She was sacked after reposting a report from Human Rights Watch on her Instagram account and is claiming, in part, this was due to expressing political opinion and racial discrimination.
The ABC has continued to deny she was sacked or that its most senior executives, including then-chair Ita Buttrose and outgoing managing director David Anderson, were influenced by pro-Israel lobbyists in their decision.
Discover more from World Byte News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
