Catholic Archbishop Philip Wilson cited in $800,000 lawsuit
CATHOLIC Archbishop Philip Wilson asked a senior church employee to “help us out” by consenting to “punishment and public humiliation” before she was unjustly fired, a lawsuit asserts.
CATHOLIC Archbishop Philip Wilson asked a senior church employee to “help us out” by consenting to “punishment and public humiliation” before she was unjustly fired, a lawsuit asserts.
His alleged conduct is at the centre of an $800,000 wrongful dismissal lawsuit filed by the church’s former director of professional standards, Susan Mary Cain.
Mrs Cain’s legal action comes just days before Archbishop Wilson faces court in NSW accused of concealing child-sex abuse dating back to the 1970s.
In her documents, Mrs Cain says she was denied procedural fairness when her co-workers complained about her and Archbishop Wilson decided she was to be disciplined.
“(She was) informed disciplinary action would now be taken against her in the form of punishment and public humiliation,” the documents assert.
“Archbishop Wilson attempted to induce the plaintiff to acquiesce to the punishment and humiliation, acknowledged by him as unjust. He asked her if she would ‘help us out’ (and) stated his belief the plaintiff was ‘too loyal’ to take legal action.”
Archbishop Wilson, 64, will face court in Newcastle on Thursday charged with one count of concealing a serious indictable offence.
NSW Police have alleged that, as a junior priest in 1976, he failed to disclose his knowledge of sexual abuse committed by paedophile priest Jim Fletcher.
Archbishop Wilson, the highest-ranking Catholic Church official in the world to be charged with the offence, is on leave and has vowed to “vigorously defend my innocence”.
In March last year, Mrs Cain appearedgave evidence to before the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse inquiry and gave evidence about the church’s response to sexual abuse by Brian Perkins at St Ann’s special school at Marion between 1985 and 1991.
Her claim against the church’s corporate arm, the Catholic Church Endowment Society, was filed with the District Court this month.
In her statement of claim, Mrs Cain, 57, says she worked for the church from September 2002 until her allegedly unfair dismissal in September 2014, earning $200,000 a year.
She says between December 2013 and March 2014, two staff members complained about her actions and the church “purported to investigate”.
“The complaints had no substance and the plaintiff responded accordingly, but she was denied procedural fairness,” the papers assert.
“On March 14, 2014, the plaintiff was informed she had been found to have engaged in inappropriate behaviour and was to be disciplined.”
Mrs Cain says that decision was postponed pending a promised independent review that never eventuated. She says that, in April 2014, she was approached by Archbishop Wilson and Vicar General Father Philip Marshall and told the disciplinary action would go ahead.
“(It would take) the form of punishment and public humiliation, involving her relocation to a different work area on another floor of the building away from her staff,” the papers assert.
“The defendant informed the plaintiff that it was concerned it may face legal consequences and damages if it was not able to appease the complainants.”
Mrs Cain asserts Archbishop Wilson “acknowledged” the decision was “unjust” but asked if she would “help us out” as church administrators “have no choice”.
She says that, following a period of leave to care for an ill relative, she was invited to a meeting “to explore the possibility of negotiating a separation package”.
The matter was not settled and on September 25, 2014, Mrs Cain received a letter stating her employment was immediately terminated due to “substandard work performance”.
The letter further stated that Mrs Cain had been fired due to “alleged serious and wilful misconduct” and “untruthful” recollections of statements made by Archbishop Wilson and Father Marshall.
Mrs Cain asks the court to award her $640,000 in lost wages, $50,000 for her period of unemployment, and $119,100 in travel and rental expenses for her new job.
She also asks for a further $20,000 in legal costs and to “eliminate or reduce future economic loss”.