Purpose

This policy is intended to guide members of the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Weather of 21st Century in the event that they wish to make a complaint about the behaviour or actions of another member (or members) of the Centre, or an external participant of an event organised by the Centre. The policy accompanies a user-friendly workflow for lodging a complaint, which can be found here.

Scope

The 21st Century Weather Complaints Policy is intended to serve as a support and coordination mechanism, but is not a formal, legal reporting pathway. The Centre is limited in its capacity to take direct action due to the fact that all members are employed by or enrolled in a university. The legal responsibility for behaviour, actions and complaints ultimately rests with the university as an employer and educational institution, even when members are engaged in core Centre of Excellence activities. While the Centre encourages members to access the Complaints Policy and associated support mechanisms to respond to adverse experiences/incidents, the Policy should not preclude the use of and does not supersede the formal reporting mechanisms available to members through their respective universities and, in the most serious cases, with the police. 

Definitions

Centre Events: Any formal event organised by the Centre. Centre Events typically have participants from multiple nodes and may be held at one of the nodes or at an off-site venue. Examples include the Annual Workshop, Project Workshops, Centre training events, etc. The definition of a Centre Event includes the formal program as well as organised activities (e.g., workshop dinners), non-organised activities (e.g., social time, drinks at a pub), and travel to/from the venue. In each instance, a particular node university of the Centre is responsible for organising a Centre Event. Legal obligations for the safety of the participants rests with the organising node university, where an Event Risk Management Plan must be developed and lodged. 

Centre Meetings: These include regular meetings with participants from multiple nodes, which are typically held in-person or in hybrid mode and may only be an hour or two in length. Examples include CI meetings, Project meetings, and Committee meetings. 

Centre Activities: These include collaborative research activities, email communications, mentoring program meetings, Centre-related travel and other similar activities taking place as a function of Centre membership. 

An Event Risk Management Plan is not required for Centre Meetings or Centre Activities. However, responsibility for the conduct of participants continues to rest with the node university where the organiser or convenor of the Centre Meeting is employed. 

Responsible Persons: The individual or individuals who are formally identified to be responsible prior to an event, who are implicitly responsible for managing or assisting to manage an incident or complaint that arises as a function of Centre Activities. 

Lead Responsible Person: The person ultimately responsible for managing the immediate response to an incident or complaint. This should always be a senior member (e.g., Director, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Investigator, etc.). In the majority of cases, the Lead Responsible Person is the most senior member of the Centre present at any given event or involved (in a position of formal responsibility) with Centre Activities. Seniority, in the following order, is determined to be:

1. Solely: Director – Christian Jakob
2. Jointly: Chief Operating Officer Tich-Lam Nguyen; all Deputy Directors, being Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, Ailie Gallant, Negin Nazarian, Liz Ritchie-Tyo; Associate Director Melissa Hart
3. Jointly: Senior Advisor Engagement & Impact Iain Strachan; Node Leaders, being Shayne McGregor, Monash University; Jo Brown, University of Melbourne; Steven Sherwood, UNSW; Neil Holbrook, University of Tasmania; Nicola Maher, Australian National University, Research Project Leads, being Ailie Gallant (Weather Resources), Lisa Alexander (High-Impact Weather), Marty Singh (Weather Systems), Julie Arblaster (Modelling Science), Claire Vincent (Climate Variability and Weather Systems) (Claire Vincent), Andrea Taschetto (Weather Systems in a Warmer World) (Andrea Taschetto).

In the unlikely event that an issue arises during an event at which none of the personnel listed above is present, the complainant is advised to contact a member of the Centre at Seniority Level 1 or 2 to seek support and receive further guidance. 

Conflicts of interest: Where a Responsible Person or Lead Responsible Person is the subject of a complaint or has an actual or perceived conflict of interest with either party, responsibility will be transferred to an alternative Responsible Person or another member of the Centre Executive.

Responsible Institution: The given university or organisation where a member or event/activity participant is employed or enrolled. This could include non-academic partner organisations and industry organisations. 

General Principles

All Centre participants are bound by their home institution’s appropriate behaviour (or equivalent) policies. Formal complaints must, for legal and compliance reasons, be routed through these channels. The Centre’s Code of Conduct defines behavioural expectations for a Centre Event, Meeting or Activity but cannot supersede policies or procedures from an individual’s Responsible Institution. The Centre’s Code of Conduct may be used in the initial assessment of an incident to help guide aspects of the response during the event (e.g., requesting someone to leave the workshop).

Incidents or complaints will typically be managed by the university responsible for hosting or organising a Centre Event via their standard process. Subsequently, and as appropriate (guided by HR and confidentiality principles), it may be necessary to notify the Centre Director of the outcome of a process (e.g., employee termination or an established management plan). Information will be shared only with those who have a legitimate need to know in order to respond to the incident, provide support, fulfil legal obligations, or conduct any subsequent process. The outcomes of formal complaints made to a Responsible Institution will ultimately be managed by the institution of the respondent. There is an expectation that, should the complainant give their consent, the Responsible Institution of the complainant also be involved in or apprised of the actions undertaken by the Responsible Institution of the respondent to address the issue in question. It is incumbent upon the Centre, as the organisation with responsibility for both parties, to facilitate this process to the best of its ability. 

Anonymous complaints and reports may be received and considered but the capacity of the Centre or the Responsible Institution to investigate or take action may be limited where information is insufficiently available.

Responding to Complaints

In the first instance, responses by Lead Responsible Persons to incidents or complaints should make sure that the victim/complainant is safe and sufficiently supported, with confidentiality paramount. The victim/complainant should not be required to repeat or relive their experience to multiple parties beyond the Lead Responsible Person wherever possible. This support should be extended to witnesses and others as appropriate. There may be incidents that are considered formally ‘reportable’. This is a legal requirement where serious incidents (e.g., assault) must be reported to the appropriate authorities and may vary by jurisdiction. The Lead Responsible Person should seek advice from the given university’s HR contacts as to whether an incident is reportable.

Principles around confidentiality should be appropriately followed. This ensures appropriate protections for the complainant, witnesses, the respondent, and the integrity of any subsequent process. In practice this would entail minimising the number of people involved in the initial response and complaint, and appropriate discretion in any communications. This process is designed primarily for a Centre Event as defined above. 

Prior to a Centre Event

All participants are to be provided with a copy of the Centre’s Code of Conduct for Events, and when registering asked to state that they will abide by that Code. For each event, for the purposes of this process, a Lead Responsible Person (who would be present for the entire event) is identified. 

For the Annual Workshop: the Lead Responsible Person would typically be the Centre Director, and the Responsible Persons would typically include the Deputy Directors, COO, Node Leads, and the Co-Chairs of the Diversity and Culture Committee, or appropriate alternative delegates. Or, for smaller events (e.g., Project Workshops): the Lead Responsible Person might be the event organiser or a member of the Centre Executive or other leadership figure present. At least one additional Responsible Person should ideally be identified.

At the Commencement of a Centre Event

In the opening address, the organiser of the event should remind participants of the Centre Code of Conduct. The Responsible Persons should be identified at the commencement of the event or be clearly identifiable (e.g., different coloured lanyard).

During the Centre Event

If a participant experiences or witnesses an event where they believe someone has acted inappropriately (as defined by the Code of Conduct or Institutional Policies) they are encouraged to:

• Ensure their immediate safety.
• Speak to a trusted colleague or friend to seek support.
• Report the incident to a Responsible Person.
• If they do not feel comfortable reporting the incident to a Responsible Person, alternatives may be their supervisor etc., who should seek their permission before reporting the incident to a Responsible Person on their behalf.
• Seek professional support through services provided by their institution (e.g., counselling service, employee assistance program, etc.)

Follow the links below to access the counselling and psychological support services freely available at your node university:

• Monash University: Students | Staff
• University of Melbourne
• University of Tasmania: Students | Staff
• Australian National University: Students | Staff
• UNSW: Students | Staff

If support services through a node university are not accessible in a reasonable timeframe, Centre members are encouraged to access the 21st Century Weather Employee Assistance Program (EAP).

Upon receiving a disclosure or complaint, the Responsible Person should:

• Ensure the safety of the complainant and that they are appropriately supported.
• Determine whether there were any witnesses to the event and make sure they are also safe and appropriately supported.
• Notify the Lead Responsible Person.
• If the Lead Responsible Person received the disclosure or complaint directly, they may wish to consult with another Responsible Person for support.

The Lead Responsible Person would then:

• Conduct a preliminary assessment of the incident, potentially in consultation with HR contacts at the Responsible Institution (provided as required by Node Leaders), to determine what immediate action is required. Interim measures may include:
  • Informal discussions with parties involved.
  • Offering additional support / adjustments to the complainant.
  • Asking someone to not participate in parts of an event.
  • Asking someone to leave the event.
• Depending on the incident they may inform the node lead of the complainant and / or respondent, to ensure they are supported via the processes of the Responsible Institution.

This preliminary assessment is not a substitute for a formal investigation, and does not preclude a formal investigation being launched at a Responsible Institution. The preliminary assessment is intended to assess immediate safety risks, identify appropriate support measures, determine whether urgent action is required and identify the appropriate institutional reporting pathway. 

During and/or after an Event

A Responsible Person (or their supervisor or node lead, if they are aware of the incident) will:

• Discuss with the complainant about the option to submit a formal complaint or determine whether the complainant feels their concerns have been sufficiently addressed informally.
• If the complainant wishes to pursue a formal complaint, the responsible person can advise where the complainant can make a formal complaint at their Responsible Institution.
• The Responsible Person should maintain a confidential written record of the report received, immediate actions taken, referrals made and any interim measures implemented. Records should be stored securely in accordance with the Responsible Institution.

The complainant’s supervisor (or node lead) should ensure that ongoing support, through their Responsible Institution processes and mechanisms, is provided to the complainant as needed.

As above, the final outcome of any complaint process will be determined primarily by the respondent’s Responsible Institution, but may involve the Centre Director, as deemed appropriate. The Centre Executive should conduct a review of any incident (ensuring appropriate confidentiality) to determine if the risk of a repeat event could be minimised for future events.