A Tasmanian aged care worker who claimed he was sacked after raising concerns about the mistreatment of vulnerable residents has failed in his attempt to overturn the rejection of his anti-discrimination complaint.
Asad Shah was dismissed by Uniting AgeWell Tasmania in February 2025. Four months later, he lodged an application with the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, alleging he had been targeted by colleagues, physically assaulted by one of them and overlooked by management after he spoke up about possible elder abuse at the facility.
The Commissioner dismissed the complaint in September 2025, ruling that it did not identify any breach of Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Act and that there was no clear link between the employer’s actions and any protected attribute held by Mr Shah.
Mr Shah then took the matter to the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, where Senior Member Robert Winter reviewed the decision. In a ruling handed down this month, Mr Winter upheld the Commissioner’s finding.
The tribunal member noted that for a claim of direct discrimination to succeed under Tasmanian law, the complainant must demonstrate they were treated less favourably because of a prescribed attribute, and that the attribute was the true reason for the treatment. In cases involving victimisation, something more than simply reporting conduct is required; the allegation must connect the complained-of behaviour to an actual or possible breach of the Act.
Mr Winter said Mr Shah had contacted a representative of his employer on 11 January 2025 about bullying and harassment by a group of carers, and again on 4 February 2025 following a physical altercation with a chef. However, the tribunal found these reports did not meet the legal test for protected conduct.
The decision brings to an end Mr Shah’s attempt to have his dismissal examined through the anti-discrimination pathway. The case highlights the challenges faced by aged care workers who raise concerns about the care of elderly residents, particularly when seeking remedies under state anti-discrimination legislation rather than federal unfair dismissal provisions.
Uniting AgeWell Tasmania has not publicly commented on the matter beyond the tribunal proceedings.
