Lessons from the Katies caseLessons from the Katies case
On July 8, the Industrial Relations Court ruled that Katies Fashions acted unlawfully in March 1995 when it made "sexist assumptions" and sacked 25 migrant women workers at its Surry Hills, Sydney, warehouse.
The women had worked for Katies for up to 25 years as stock sorters and packers. Because they had been excluded from the "heavier" work of clothes bagging, the women lost their jobs when all sorters and packers were sacked as part of the company's relocation to Waterloo. The male clothes baggers were found new jobs at the Waterloo site.
The court found that Katies had breached the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act and therefore there was no reason for dismissing the women under the 1996 Workplace Relations Act.
It also found that the company had not provided proper interpreter services for the women, who are from non-English speaking backgrounds, when they were informed of their dismissal.
The women had to strike and picket Katies premises just to get a redundancy package that was still far short of that offered to public servants. Retraining or redeployment to another job in the Coles Myer empire, of which Katies is a part, was never considered by the company.
The women's applications were taken to the IRC by the NSW Working Women's Centre. Of the 25, eight cases were ruled on last week; the remainder are expected to be resolved by next month.
The ruling is an important censuring of sex discrimination by employers. It acknowledges that the sexual segregation of the work force, in which women are concentrated in particular lower skilled, lower paid industries and classifications, makes women more vulnerable to exploitation.
It also reveals serious inadequacies in current anti-discrimination law. Of the eight women, only six were awarded compensation. By law, this can take into account only"loss of income". The personal stress, trauma and loss of employment continuity are not deemed relevant.
Of the six women awarded payments, only three received the maximum allowable amount — just $10,475. Since most of the women have not been able to get paid work since 1995, such a paltry sum is hardly real compensation.
Given that many of the women are unlikely to find work again, the court's refusal to order their reinstatement consigns these women to permanent "loss of income".
The Katies workers' courageous fight against this huge corporation is an inspiration and lesson to all workers suffering exploitation and discrimination. However, it is not one that will be easily repeated.
Under the Howard government's reactionary industrial relations "reforms", the federal IRC was absorbed into the Federal Court in May.
Any similar claims of unfair dismissal on the grounds of sex or race discrimination must now be made in the Federal Court, a prohibitively expensive procedure for most workers.
For generally low-paid women and migrant workers, the legal right to be free of discrimination in the workplace has been rendered little more than a formal right they will not be able to exercise.
Formal rights need to be backed up by organised action by workers and the unemployed to defend and enforce them.
By Lisa Macdonald