An executive is suing over HR gossip and surveillance.

The Director of Supply Chain Operations at Australian Dairy Park, has lodged a lawsuit against the infant milk subsidiary of Ausnutria, alleging serious workplace misconduct by the HR department. 

The case, which is currently before the Federal Court, could have broader implications for workplace regulations and HR practices in Australia.

According to the statement of claim, the executive accuses the company’s HR head of spreading unfounded rumours about him and engaging in surveillance, which he argues contributed to a hostile work environment. 

This alleged conduct included public shaming and a purported readiness to terminate employees without just cause. 

The dispute escalated following claims that the HR head instructed another HR employee to monitor the executive and report on his interactions within the company.

His grievances are not just about personal mistreatment but point to a potential misuse of power within the HR department.

His allegations describe a scenario where the HR head purportedly told staff members, including the executive, that she could act with impunity, exemplified by her threat to terminate another HR manager during her probation period.

In a dramatic confrontation, the executive reportedly told the HR head; “If you can’t work with people you don’t like, then maybe it’s you who should f--- off”, a remark he later addressed with an apology to the CEO, although maintaining his stance on the HR head’s management style. 

The HR disputes have culminated in the executive seeking damages for loss of income, damage to mental health, medical expenses, and an ongoing unfitness to work, all while being on WorkCover since the previous May due to anxiety attributed to these workplace issues.

Ausnutria has responded by denying the allegations, adding a twist by accusing the executive of bullying as well. 

Further complicating the HR landscape at Australian Dairy Park, the executive also brought up instances of exclusion in meetings and inappropriate identification of staff involved in a safety incident, which the HR head argued should be grounds for termination. 

The case is currently in mediation, and its outcome could have significant ramifications for HR policies and employee relations practices, particularly regarding the treatment of personal conflicts and the boundaries of HR authority.