8.1. Enquiry Data

The Commission provides a free, impartial and confidential enquiry service to support and educate community members in understanding their rights and responsibilities under equal opportunity law. Details of enquiries are recorded to understand the types of discrimination faced by members of the community and their informational needs. This assists us to better target the delivery of information, resources and training.
There were 607 enquiries received in 2019-20 - a 7% increase in enquiries from the previous financial year. The past three years were relatively static in the number of enquiries (Table A1), with a significant reduction from the number reported in 2015-16. This is, in part, attributable to an increase in customer usage of self-service information and resources made available through the Commission’s website.

Table A1: Number of enquiries received

Enquiries to the Commission can be made via a range of methods, but almost 90% of enquiries were made by telephone (64%) or email (25%) in the 2019-20 financial year. Although this is a similar percentage to the previous four years for these methods combined, it should be noted that there was a 59% increase in email enquiries and a 21% decrease in telephone enquiries in 2019-20 when compared to the average for these methods of enquiry over the previous four years.

The Commission assisted enquirers in a number of ways (Table A2).

Table A2: Enquiry outcomes

¹. 100% is the rounded value.

Disability, race, sexual harassment and sex discrimination were the most commonly-reported grounds of discrimination by enquirers in the 2019-20 financial year. This is similar to the previous four years. It should be noted a substantial percentage of enquiries to the Commission are not related to any ground or area under the Act (Table A3).

Table A3: Top seven grounds of discrimination identified by enquirers

¹. There may be more than one ground/issue per enquiry.
². 100% is the rounded value.

The areas of employment and goods and services remained the most commonly identified areas of discrimination under the EO Act by enquirers in 2019-20 (Table A4).

Table A4: Areas of discrimination identified by enquirers

¹. Enquiry matters that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (SA) are not included in this table.
². 100% is the rounded value.

Table A5 shows the gender identity of enquirers (where known).

Table A5: Gender identity of enquirers

¹. 100% is the rounded value.

8.2. Complaint Data

The Commission has implemented substantial business performance improvements in complaint-handling over the past four years, in order to streamline the complaint-handling process, reduce administrative duplication and workload, and improve the timeliness and efficiency of complaints management.

Table A6 shows the number of complaints lodged, closed and carried over in the 2019-20 financial year, compared with the four previous years.

Table A6: Number of complaints lodged, closed and carried forward

Most complaints (77%) were made directly via the online complaint form on the Commission’s website. However, an additional 16% were lodged via email (often via a legal representative), 5% through submission of a hard copy complaint form, and 2% via a letter posted to the Commission.

8.2.1. Complaint Assessment

Table A7 shows the number of complaints assessed, accepted, declined at lodgement, and not initiated at lodgement in 2019-20 compared with the previous four years. There was a 36% increase in the number of complaints assessed in 2019-20 compared to the previous year– which is substantial given the decrease in conciliation staff to only 2 FTE.

Table A7: Number of complaints assessed and outcomes of assessment

¹. ‘Not initiated’ complaints are those that do not initiate the SA EO Act – i.e. where there is no ground covered by the Act in the complaint.
². One case was undetermined at 30 June 2020.

In 2019-20 there was again a substantial (32%) decrease in the average complaint assessment time (from 6.6 weeks in 2018-19 to 4.5 weeks in 2019-20). Complaint assessment time has been reduced by 62% when compared to 2016-17 (the latter being the year that business performance improvement processes were introduced).

Table A8: Complaint assessment times  

¹. Complaint assessment times were not measured prior to 2016/17.

The time taken to finalise complaints was also substantially decreased in the 2019-20 financial year. As Table A9 shows, there was a 41% reduction in the time taken to finalise complaints in 2019-20 when compared to the previous year. The time taken to finalise complaints in 2019-20 was 56% lower than in 2016-17 when business performance processes were first introduced.

Table A9: Finalisation times for all Complaints

¹. Accepted complaints were finalised in an average of 13.6 weeks and rejected complaints in an average of 5.2 weeks.

8.2.2. Grounds and Areas of Complaints

Disability was the most common ground of discrimination (occurring as a ground in 50 accepted complaints). Although this has been a consistent trend for many years (and is similar in other Australian jurisdictions), there was a considerable decrease in the percentage of disability discrimination complaints (21%) and substantial increases in the number (and percentage) of complaints alleging sexual harassment (20%), victimisation (14%) sex (11%) and race (10%) discrimination. Complaints of age discrimination represented 7% of the total grounds (Table A10).
Employment and education are the most common areas for accepted complaints.

Table A10 (3 parts): Complaints by ground and areas of discrimination (accepted complaints)

¹. Refers to complaints of victimisation under the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993 (SA), the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2018 (SA) or the Independent Commissioner for Corruption Act 2012 (SA).

Note: - In a column means zero.
Note: There may be more than one ground per complaint.
Note: Data in Table A11 will vary slightly from year to year due to database corrections and changes during the period a complaint is open.

8.2.3. Outcomes of Accepted Complaints

Of the 114 accepted complaints finalised in the 2019-20 financial year, 70 conciliations were undertaken. Of these, 57 (81%) were successful.

As Table A11 shows, 50% of all accepted complaints (57) were resolved by conciliation. 26 complaints (23%) were referred to the Tribunal (with 11 being referred post-conciliation and 15 being referred without attempting conciliation) and 31 complaints (27%) were declined by the Commissioner following further investigation or withdrawn by complainant (in two of the latter cases, conciliation was attempted).

Table A11: Outcomes of finalised accepted complaints

¹. There were 70 conciliations attempted in 2019-20 and 57 of these were successful, representing an 81% success rate.
². Eleven of these cases were referred to the Tribunal after conciliation and 15 were referred without attempting conciliation.
³. Two of these cases were declined/withdrawn after conciliation.

8.2.4. Complaint outcomes resulting from settlement agreements

The issuing of an apology and financial compensation were the most common outcomes achieved in settlement agreements made in conciliation in 2019-20 (Table A12). Settlement agreements can include more than one outcome, and not all successful conciliations involve a written agreement.

Table A12: Outcomes resulting from conciliated settlement agreements

¹. There may be more than one outcome per conciliation agreement.

Table A13: Financial component in settlement agreements

¹. Individual agreements for financial compensation ranged from $20,000 to $300 in 2019-20.

8.2.5. Complainant Demographic Information

As Table A14 shows, the majority of complainants (77%) in 2019-20 were aged between 20 and 59. There was a large increase in the percentage of complainants aged 20-29 in 2019-20 (double the average of the previous 4 years).

As Table A15 shows, similar to the average over the previous 4 years, a higher proportion (59%) of complainants were female in 2019-20. A small proportion (3%) of complainants identified as transgender/intersex/gender diverse/non-binary.

Table A14: Age group of complainants (accepted)

* 100% is the rounded value.

Table A15: Gender identity of complainants (accepted)

¹. 100% is the rounded value.

8.2.6. Satisfaction with Complaint Handling Services

Customer satisfaction surveys are sent to all parties to a complaint (complainants and respondents) following complaint finalisation. A total of 72 evaluation surveys were returned in the 2019-20 reporting period. Survey results indicated 96% overall satisfaction with the Commission’s complaint-handling services (Table A16).

Table A16: Survey evaluation results of complaint-handling services

Survey respondents are also asked for their comments and/or suggestions on how to improve our service. Feedback was as follows:

• I have never dealt with the commission before but believe the process was handled in an excellent and professional manner. Thank you [Conciliation Officer] for your professionalism and guidance in this matter. No improvement needed in my opinion
• I was very happy with the service provided and hope that the Minister will fund the EOC adequately in the future. This is a public service of great value to the community and a fully funded service enables the EOC to meet the Government's obligations to enable citizens’ rights and probably saves money in the long run.
• [Conciliation Officer] was very professional and caring of my wellbeing during the afternoon of my conference. I really appreciated that. Thanks. Give [Conciliation Officer] a pay rise!!
• No. The person who done our complaint was kind respectful and learnt about disability in sporting activities.
• I thank [Conciliation Officer] for [their] assistance.
• I found this process was not as daunting as I thought it would be and the people in the involved were very helpful and courteous. A big thank you to all.
• The matter was handled very professionally.
• [Conciliation Officer] provided an exceptional level of service, showing compassion and true impartiality.
• The experience could not be improved on. It was handled with professionalism and empathy.
• The professionalism of [Conciliation Officer] was outstanding and resulted in the parties being able to negotiate an outcome that met both needs.
• I write to thank you for the assistance you provided to [complainant]. I acknowledge the professionalism and empathy you displayed in dealing with this matter. My thanks also to the Commission and Dr Vincent for providing assistance to a vulnerable person in difficult circumstances.
• Thank you for your assistance with this matter, I sincerely feel you went above and beyond and I appreciate the assistance you have given me in regards to the whole situation…
• Very happy with the way [Conciliation Officer] handled a complex and sensitive matter. [Conciliation Officer] approach was measured, reasonable and fair.
• The only comment I have is with regards to the settlement agreement, we used the commissions template and we realised that we should have been clearer about the monetary component in relation to the payment being subject to tax or not. As much of a learning for us.
• I would like to say that [Conciliation Officer] was an outstanding mediator and I really appreciated the manner in which [Conciliation Officer] communicated with me.
• People with rights need to consider other people's rights too...if person being complained about have serious problems that their complainant rights affect. This needs serious considerations for future reference.
• [Conciliation Officer] was an outstanding mediator - my compliments - [Conciliation Officer] is gold.
• Greater focus on ensuring the most senior person in the agency/respondent is engaged with the complaint
• I am so pleased that I went down this path in my situation otherwise nothing would have been achieved.
• Our conciliation officer was amazing. [Conciliation Officer] was able to explain things very well and was able to allocate time for questions or clarification to be answered.
• [Conciliation Officer] was very helpful and professional throughout the process

8.3. Exemption Requests

As discussed in section 4.1.1.3. of this report, section 92 of the Act provides for applicants to apply to the SA Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT) for an exemption from the Act for a specific purpose. The SACAT provides the Commissioner with a copy of all applications received, to enable her to review the application and make any submissions she considers necessary before an application is considered by the SACAT.

Below is a brief summary of all applications received by the Commission in 2019-20.