PwC, ex-employee urged to consider settlement of bullying case to avoid legal costs

A former senior associate at PwC, who is suing the embattled firm over bullying allegations and indifference to her complaints, has been urged to adopt a ‘pragmatic’ approach to her dispute.

A judge has urged PwC to settle a bullying lawsuit with an ex-employee. Picture: Damian Shaw/NCA NewsWire

A former senior associate at PwC, who is suing the embattled accounting and advisory firm over bullying allegations, was urged to adopt a “pragmatic” approach to her dispute and consider settling the case.

Jane Langley, alleges that from 2020 she was bullied at work by another PwC senior staff member in the diversity and inclusion team, and had lodged formal complaints about it before being unfairly dismissed.

Judge Doug Humphreys of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, at a Thursday hearing, encouraged lawyers for Ms Langley and for PwC to explore settlement options, reminding them of potential substantial costs involved if the matter proceeds.

Addressing Ms Langley’s lawyer, the judge asked the plaintiff to “be very pragmatic as to what it is they can get out of the matter,” because, he said, even if she succeeds, she “will have to pay their own legal costs.”

“There is a very, very limited window for cost orders to be made in this matter,” Mr Humphreys said.

Legal cases about work rights under the Fair Work Act are normally considered as “no cost jurisdiction” cases where all parties bear their own costs.

However, Justice Humphreys reminded both parties that under section 570 of the Act, if a party rejected a “reasonable” settlement offer, “that may well enliven the cost jurisdiction,” he said.

He also asked PwC to take a “very commercial” approach and consider whether the legal costs of defending the claim could be higher than any settlement amount.

In her claim, filed on March 14, Ms Langley said her position of people and culture senior associate was made redundant in November last year because she raised concerns about “significant and repeated bullying” with management, including with Qantas’ new chief people officer Catherine Walsh who worked in the same role for PwC for four years prior to January.

PwC slashed about 330 jobs in November amid the fallout from a global tax scandal that in July last year forced it to sell its public sector consulting arm for $1 after it leaked secret government tax plans to companies.

Ms Langley’s allegations are made against PricewaterhouseCoopers, listed as the first respondent, and diversity and inclusion team leader Andrew Tran, who is listed at the second respondent.

At the hearing on Thursday, lawyers for PwC complained Ms Langley and her advisers had not yet served the second respondent.

They also complained about The Australian contacting PwC after the lawsuit was filed, but before the firm was served, despite the plaintiffs having email addresses available to do so in a timely manner.

“In our opinion, it has caused significant prejudice to both the first and the second respondent who is an employee of the first respondent and has unfairly positioned us in these proceedings,” PwC workplace lawyer Melini Pillay said.

“What we are asking for is just the courtesy to be informed of matters before they are taken to the media.”

Justice Humphreys said he understood there was no rule of court that required PwC to be served before the media was contacted.

The Australian obtained by Ms Langley’s documents from the Federal Court of Australia, after submitting a formal request to review the material.

The judge also scolded Ms Pillay, as she seemed to be representing both PwC and the second respondent, Mr. Tran, despite denying that she was acting for the latter.

Kristian Bolwell, an employment law solicitor appearingfor the plaintiff, Ms Langley, denied he had leaked to the media, saying he had been instructed by his client to give “no comment” if contacted by newspapers.

“I think my friend is insinuating that we have somehow leaked documents to the media, but I can advise the court that we were just as surprised as perhaps she was to be contacted by media institutions,” he, said.

He added Ms Langley had told him she had not contacted the media. “It would mean my client had lied to me, if that is the case. She told me she was unhappy about being contacted by the media as well. So I don’t think she has shared anything.”

Justice Humphreys ordered Mr Langley to serve the second respondent by email within 48 hours.

He set a further directions hearing for May 10 and said that while it was premature to make orders about mediation, he expected he might eventually do so after that hearing.

“I’m urging you to turn around and take a very hard pragmatic look at this and have discussions with your clients,” he said.

Ms Langley alleged she started experiencing bullying from Mr Tran from 2020, while working in the diversity, inclusion and wellbeing team.

In July 2022, a formal HR investigation into her team commenced, and by October of that year, she had alerted PwC’s then-chief people officer Catherine Walsh about her allegations, according to the documents.

Although the investigation was ongoing, the documents say Ms Langley continued to raise concerns about its alleged mishandling and the toll it was taking on her mental wellbeing. She complained to Kate Farrington – acting director of PwC’s Wellbeing, Health and Safety – in March 2023, and then again with her new team leader Lily Tran in September 2023 and another director, Dani Odd, in October 2023, according to the documents.

Her April 2023 performance review acknowledged the detrimental effect the events had on her health, the documents say. However, in November 2023, amid a restructuring, Ms. Langley received a termination letter stating her role was no longer required, and she was made redundant on November 17.

Originally published as PwC, ex-employee urged to consider settlement of bullying case to avoid legal costs