Sally Rugg v Monique Ryan: Judge’s brutal words for teal MP’s ex-staffer

A judge has slammed the evidence of a former chief of staff who wanted to continue working for a federal teal MP despite suing her.

An attempt by the ex-chief of staff of Kooyong MP Monique Ryan to maintain her taxpayer-funded role while she sues her boss and the Commonwealth over her working conditions has been dismissed by a Federal Court judge.

Instead, Judge Debra Mortimer found on Tuesday that Sally Rugg’s application to retain her plush $160,000 role was more likely motivated by her desire to remain in Canberra’s political environment rather than working alongside Dr Ryan.

Ms Rugg initiated legal action against Dr Ryan over what she alleges were the Teal MP’s breaches of the Fair Work Act, which she said involved requiring her to work unreasonable hours.

In her written judgment, Judge Mortimer was critical of aspects of Ms Rugg’s evidence and found there was “little of anything” in her declared aspirations to be a politician and her view of herself as a force behind the teal movement “that refers to supporting and assisting Dr Ryan”.

Monique Ryan and Sally Rugg in happier times. Ms Rugg is suing Dr Ryan and the Commonwealth over what she says were breached of the Fair Work Act.

“It is all about Ms Rugg,” Judge Mortimer wrote.

Ms Rugg, who claimed she was regularly required to work 70-80 hours per week, submitted that she and Dr Ryan could be “mature” and continue working together until their trial, or she could be placed on “miscellaneous leave” until her case was tried.

Dr Ryan, who unseated Josh Frydenberg from the former blue-ribbon seat in last year’s federal election, opposed this on the grounds that their relationship was “not salvageable” and she had lost “all trust and confidence” in her former chief of staff.

In one passage, Judge Mortimer was highly dismissive of Ms Rugg’s submissions, finding they had a “high degree of unreality to them”.

Ms Rugg (second from left) wanted to continue working for Dr Ryan as the court case played out. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Ian Currie

“They appeared to depend in part on a scenario in which Ms Rugg would set her own boundaries about what work she would do and how much work she considered reasonable, and Dr Ryan would – apparently because of Ms Rugg’s affidavit evidence in this proceeding – elect to modify her expectations accordingly,” she wrote.

Last week, the Federal Court was told that Ms Rugg claimed Dr Ryan told her she could leave “no paper trail” as she detailed an off-the-books plan to move Ms Rugg on.

She also tendered that Dr Ryan told her she needed staff who were prepared to work harder as she wanted to be prime minister one day.

As well as dismissing Ms Rugg’s application, Judge Mortimer ordered the matter to be listed for a case management hearing before a trial date is set.

A statement from Maurice Blackburn Lawyers principal Josh Bornstein, one of the lawyers representing Ms Rugg, said their focus would go to preparing for a trial, which he said would decide whether a 70-hour work week was lawful under the Fair Work Act.

“Sally Rugg is disappointed the court did not grant her interlocutory application to allow her to keep her job, noting her relationship with Dr Ryan is unrecoverable,” Mr Bornstein said in the statement.

“Nevertheless, the case is at an early stage.

“The focus will now turn on preparing the case for trial, which will consider whether 70-hour working weeks, almost twice the ordinary working week of 38 hours, is lawful under the Fair Work Act.”

“The issues to be considered at trial will have far-reaching ramifications for all Australians who work in industries where long hours are expected and normalised.”