The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission has found that the Royal Automobile Club of Queensland (RACQ) unlawfully discriminated against a long-serving employee when it required medical clearance from her husband’s specialist before allowing her to return to work during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The customer service officer, who had been with RACQ for 36 years, took leave early in the pandemic to protect her husband, who lives with multiple sclerosis and Churg-Strauss syndrome. When she sought to resume her role on reduced hours and duties, her manager insisted on specialist confirmation that her return would not endanger her husband’s health.

Although her husband’s doctor provided a statement noting no objection to her resuming work, RACQ rejected the clearance, claiming it could only support a work-from-home arrangement. The officer objected, citing lack of a proper home workstation and concerns about the impact on her mental health. Her husband’s specialist had also explained that they could not guarantee he would be free of risk if she returned to in-person duties.

Commissioner Sharron Caddie ruled that RACQ had directly discriminated against the officer on the basis of her family responsibilities, as the requirement placed an unnecessary condition linked to her husband’s impairment. The Commissioner emphasised that workplace health and safety laws did not extend to protecting every member of the public, noting that “a duty of care is not owed to the whole world.”

While the Commission accepted RACQ’s later decision to dismiss the officer on medical grounds, it ordered the organisation to pay $25,000 in general damages. The ruling recognised the hurt caused by the discriminatory conduct and the officer’s sense of abandonment after decades of service.

The case is Rutherford v RACQ Operations Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2025] QIRC 207.