The Sydney juror, the murder trial and the employer’s threats

An employer in Sydney’s inner west who threatened to sack a woman for declining to work shifts while serving jury duty in a murder trial has become one of the few Australian bosses prosecuted under laws protecting jurors.

The juror worked three out of every four weekends at a vintage clothing shop and was “advised by the judge to take weekends off to process the case”, the NSW Department of Communities and Justice said.

Juror E was threatened with the sack by her employer for refusing to work shifts during a murder trial. Silhouette does not depict the juror, whose identity is covered by a suppression order.Credit: Jamie Brown

The murder trial ran between February and April last year. The identity of the employee, referred to as Juror E, is protected by a suppression order.

“Despite two letters from the judge stating the juror was to rest on the weekends, the employer contacted her to say she had breached company policy by failing to fulfil her working hours,” the department said.

“After returning to work, the woman was informed of an upcoming disciplinary hearing, where she faced either a warning or termination.”

Her employer, a company, was found guilty in the NSW Local Court last month of charges of threatening an employee serving as a juror with dismissal or injury to their employment because they were summoned to serve on a jury. The company will be sentenced later this year.

The maximum penalty for a company is a $22,000 fine. For a person, it is a $5500 fine, imprisonment for up to 12 months, or both.

JUROR PROTECTIONS

Under the NSW Jury Act, an employer:

• Cannot dismiss an employee, injure them in their employment or alter their position to their prejudice because they have been summoned to serve as a juror;
• Cannot threaten an employee with any of the above; and
• Must not require an employee to use their leave entitlements to serve jury duty. But an employee can use their leave if they wish.

Under the NSW Jury Act, employers are also barred from requiring employees to work on days on which they are serving jury duty. However, they are not prevented from requiring workers “to carry out work during normal working hours” on any day the jury is not required to attend court.

A NSW Sheriff’s Office spokesperson said the significant case underlined the “critical role” played by jurors in the judicial system.

“It also highlights the obligations employers have to their employees who are selected to sit on a jury panel.”

University of Sydney Law School Professor David Rolph, an expert in the law of contempt, said that “even though these offences exist under jury legislation around Australia, thankfully, courts have not had to penalise employers frequently under them”.

“It’s obviously important for the administration of justice that these offences exist.

“In addition to specific statutory offences, an employer can commit a contempt of court by seeking to prevent a person from complying with a direction to serve as a juror, such as by dismissing or penalising an employee, or threatening to do either of those things.”

In a classic 1981 contempt case, an employer was accused of dismissing an employee because he was summoned for jury service. However, the Full Court of the Western Australian Supreme Court did not find this had been proven.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter