Sally Rugg vows to continue workplace fight despite court blow

Sally Rugg’s lawyers will now turn their attention to trial, after a judge ruled her application to prevent her from being sacked be dismissed.

Monique Ryan and Sally Rugg in happier times.

Teal independent Monique Ryan’s former chief of staff Sally Rugg failed to convince a federal court judge she wanted to keep her job to support her ex-boss, instead giving evidence about her own ambitions of a political career in arguments that were “all about Ms Rugg”.

Federal court judge Debra Mortimer decided on Tuesday Dr Ryan would not be forced to work with Ms Rugg until a trial could be held to test allegations she was made to work “unreasonable hours” and breached the Fair Work Act.

After attempts to mediate despite what Dr Ryan called their “irreparable” relationship fell through, Ms Rugg forged ahead with an interlocutory application to stop her employer and the commonwealth from legally tearing up her employment contract.

But instead of proving to Justice Mortimer “a powerful desire by Ms Rugg to really get back to assisting Dr Ryan with her parliamentary duties”, her “principal objective is to continue working in the parliamentary environment in Canberra”.

“The evidence about her personal objectives is relevant because it persuades me there is no prospect whatsoever of a co-operative working relationship being restored because – even for the purposes of her own application – Ms Rugg cannot bring herself to express her dedication to assisting Dr Ryan,” Justice Mortimer said.

“She instead focuses on her own career objectives. Which … are perfectly understandable and not to be criticised in themselves.

“They weigh against the grant of relief Ms Rugg seeks. I am far from persuaded Ms Rugg really wants to go back to work supporting and assisting Dr Ryan.”

Justice Mortimer said Ms Rugg did not outline how she could manage day-to-day tensions with Dr Ryan if they were to work together or propose how her concerns about excessive work hours could be addressed.

Instead, Ms Rugg’s affidavit is “more fulsome” of how much she enjoys “being in the parliamentary environment in Canberra”, she said.

“I aspire to one day be a parliamentarian, and I am sympathetic to the ‘teal’ movement,” Ms Rugg said in her affidavit.

“My ability to assist the movement (and pursue my dream of being a parliamentarian), would be irreparably affected if the termination were to proceed.”

Justice Mortimer said there was little evidence the two women could work together until a trial, which would likely not take place until July at the earliest. “It is all about Ms Rugg,” she said.

Earlier on Tuesday, Justice Mortimer adjourned the court after a minutes-long hearing and ordered her reasons be published. Ms Rugg and Dr Ryan did not attend the hearing.

In her affidavit, Dr Ryan said her trust in Ms Rugg started to deteriorate in November last year after she travelled on a flight knowing she had Covid-19.

“I believe that our relationship is irreparable,” she said.

“Mr Rugg states … she is confident that she could continue to work with me. I do not understand how she could believe that when less than a month ago she was not willing to even speak with me, and wanted all further correspondence with me to be in writing.”

Dr Ryan said she did not believe Ms Rugg had the “ability to perform the work that I require her to perform” as chief of staff, and would be better suited to a media or policy adviser role.

Ms Rugg was not willing to perform the community engagement elements of the chief of staff role to engage with Dr Ryan's constituents in the Melbourne electorate of Kooyong, Dr Ryan said.

Ms Rugg claimed her role involved working between 70 and 80 hours a week, and included regular travel to Canberra with Dr Ryan.

A trial date is yet to be set but the parties will have a case management meeting before March.