Paul Kent takes aim at ‘sham’ sacking in broadside at News Corp

Rugby league journalist Paul Kent has branded his sacking by News Corp as a “sham” in a scathing attack of the media giant, who he claims did not afford him a proper opportunity to be heard before it terminated his employment over a street fight in Sydney’s inner west.

The 54-year-old accuses the company of multiple breaches of employment law including by not paying him while he was stood down for seven months last year defending domestic violence charges on which he was found not guilty.

Paul Kent leaves the Downing Centre court complex in Sydney in May.Credit: Kate Geraghty

In documents released to this masthead by the Fair Work Commission, Kent claims Nationwide News, a subsidiary of News Corp in Australia, “acted in a way that was arbitrary, capricious [and] unreasonable” in summarily dismissing him on May 30, indicating he may pursue it for damages in the Federal Court.

A month earlier he had been suspended from duties for a second time in a year after vision of a violent altercation between him and another man outside a bar in Rozelle emerged and triggered a police investigation.

Kent, who co-hosted the program NRL 360 on Fox Sports and was a columnist for The Daily Telegraph, was charged with affray and in July pleaded guilty and was placed on a good-behaviour bond, in a Sydney court, failing to have the matter dealt with on mental health grounds.

By then, he had already received his marching orders from News Corp, his employer of 24 years, after an internal investigation into the brawl determined he had violated its misconduct and code of conduct policies and adversely affected News’ reputation.

Kent alleges in an unfair dismissal application to be heard in Sydney next week that his conduct did not justify instant dismissal and that he had not had the chance to give his side of the story before he was shown the door, having advised the company that he was unfit for work and getting mental health treatment when he was asked on May 23 to show cause why he should not be terminated.

“The move to summarily dismiss [Kent] for serious misconduct bespeaks a process that was rushed, lacked a proper operational basis” and was “specifically calculated to remove [Kent] from [News Corp’s] business”, his application said.

Kent claims News Corp’s approach with him was also inconsistent with how it has treated other employees who have wound up in trouble and that the company has “tolerated or condoned the behaviour of other employees alleged to have engaged in misconduct over the course of their employment”.

Kent added that the manner of his dismissal was “a sham, concocted by [News Corp] to disguise their real reason for acting” – because he had taken issue with how he was treated while suspended last year facing allegations of domestic violence against his ex-partner.

Kent was an on-air figure at Fox Sports, a division of News Corp-owned pay TV operator Foxtel.Credit: Bloomberg

Insisting he was entitled to the presumption of innocence, he had complained about being stood down without pay between May 14 last year and January 7 and revealed he had last December rejected a new contract that was on less favourable terms.

“As a result of the stand-down direction and the public statements made by [News Corp] in respect of the DV matters, [Kent] was subjected to significant online and verbal abuse. The abuse [Kent] was subjected to during the stand-down period included repeated reference to him being a ‘woman basher’ and ‘rapist’ and included people stating to [Kent] that they wanted him to die,” the Fair Work application said.

He is seeking the reinstatement of unpaid wages and entitlements and compensation for the deterioration of his mental health as well for “pain, suffering humiliation and distress”.

News Corp denies Kent’s claims in its response to the Fair Work Commission.

It maintained it was entitled to dismiss him summarily under its journalists’ enterprise agreement, which permits termination for “conduct that justifies instant dismissal”.

The company outlined its reasons for sacking him in a letter from its Australian general manager of employee relations Andrew Biocca which said Kent had instigated a physical alteration in a public place, called the other man a “weak c---”, a “f---ing dog” and a “dog head” and thrown punches at him and that the incident had been the subject of significant media reporting and had resulted in him being charged by police.

News Corp described Kent’s conduct on the night as “especially serious in its character and consequences for the reputation of [the company]” considering his profile and the coverage of the melee.

It disputed Kent’s claim that he was dismissed because he was absent from work as a result of illness or injury, saying it was without any reasonable foundation.

News Corp denied that any abuse suffered by Kent was caused by its actions.