A former Defence Department chief engineer alleges that an aggressive Army Colonel tried to bully him out his job causing him to suffer a major depressive episode.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
However, his subsequent claim for compensation has been rejected after an independent tribunal found the Colonel's behaviour was reasonable and even compassionate.
Dr George Favas was the former chief engineer at the Defence Department's Joint Fuels and Lubricants Agency, responsible for advising the department on petroleum and oil use, as well as fuel quality control for aircraft and ships.
Concerns about his performance in the role culminated in an informal meeting with the agency's director, Colonel Mark Harnwell, in March 2014.
During the meeting Dr Favas alleged that he was told to leave his job and could choose to go "the easy way or the aggressive way".
"[Colonel Harnwell's] physical posture along with his expressed resentment clearly demonstrated a hostile attitude to me," Dr Favas told the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
"He had no basis for demanding that I give up my job, he was merely bullying me."
Immediately following the meeting a distressed Dr Favas left the office to see his doctor.
"He said that he was afraid of Colonel Harnwell's aggressive demeanour, was very anxious, felt palpitations and chest pain," the tribunal was told.
"He said he had some difficulty breathing and was shaking and trembling."
Dr Favas took the case to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in August after he unsuccessfully lodged a compensation claim with Comcare in 2014.
Colonel Harnwell told the tribunal that Dr Favas had been encouraged to move into a different role within Defence when it became apparent he was ill-suited to the chief engineering job.
He said the department had also been willing to supplement any difference in income that might arise as a result of the switch.
"The evidence shows that Colonel Harnwell had documented, over a considerable period, his concerns about the performance of Dr Favas in the role of chief engineer," the tribunal found.
"This was because Colonel Harnwell did not believe that Dr Favas possessed the requisite leadership or management skills to continue to perform the duties of chief engineer to the required standard.
"He was also concerned at the level of stress and anxiety exhibited by Dr Favas in the several months that Dr Favas had occupied the chief engineer position."
Although Dr Favas alleged that the cause of his depression and anxiety was a result of "unreasonable" action on the part of Colonel Harnwell, the tribunal was not able to conclude this was the case.
"Colonel Harnwell made his views known to Dr Favas and there is nothing in any of the documents to suggest that he acted in a malicious or negative manner in his dealings with Dr Favas leading up to the 21 March 2014 meeting," the tribunal concluded.
"He had encouraged Dr Favas to develop a positive work/life balance and the two exchanged warm Christmas and New Year greetings."
The tribunal concluded that "reasonable" administrative steps had been taken by Colonel Harnwell, and for this reason Dr Favas was not entitled to compensation for his condition.
