State of Victoria v Schou (No 2)

The case of the State of Victoria against Schou (No 2) involved the plaintiff, Ms Schou, who worked for the Hansard department of the Victorian government. She argued that a condition of employment requiring employees to be on-site when Parliament was sitting amounted to indirect discrimination under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984. Ms Schou, who was both a reporter and a sub-editor, claimed that her responsibilities as a parent necessitated her presence at home, and that the refusal to allow her to work from home via modem was unreasonable. The court had to decide whether this requirement constituted indirect discrimination under the Act.

The primary legal issue in this case was whether the condition imposed by the Hansard department constituted indirect discrimination against Ms Schou. The court needed to determine whether the requirement to attend on-site was reasonable and if alternative means of working, such as working from home via a modem, should be considered. The court had to balance the employer’s requirements with the needs of the employee, particularly in light of her parental responsibilities.

In reaching its decision, the court considered the specific circumstances of Ms Schou's employment and her responsibilities. It found that the requirement for employees to be on-site when Parliament was sitting was reasonable and necessary for the efficient operation of the Hansard department. The court also noted that the department had considered alternative arrangements but found them unsuitable. The court concluded that there was no indirect discrimination, as the condition applied uniformly to all employees and was not based on any protected attribute.

The court ultimately ruled in favour of the State of Victoria, holding that the employment condition did not constitute indirect discrimination. The court’s decision recognised the necessity of the requirement for the efficient functioning of the Hansard department and dismissed Ms Schou’s claim. The court did not find it necessary to consider alternative means of working, as the requirement was deemed reasonable and justified.