‘Nein, Nein’ public servant guilty of workplace misconduct for ridiculing German office colleague
A Queensland public servant has been formally reprimanded for misconduct over her “troubling lack of insight” following a clash with an “abrupt” German colleague.
A Queensland public servant has been formally reprimanded for workplace misconduct after she used the phrase “Nein, Nein” in reference to her “abrupt” German office colleague she clashed with, and “mocked” with the secret moniker “Helga”, a tribunal has heard.
Nikki Hornberg, who works for the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) in Warwick, took her fight to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission arguing the reprimand and extra training she was slapped with on March 11 should be withdrawn as it was unfair and unreasonable.
But in his decision handed down on July 17, QIRC Commissioner John Dwyer ruled that the reprimand was fair and should remain as Ms Hornberg had been racial stereotyping her German co-worker who reportedly spoke with a strong German accent, but who was not named Helga.
Mr Dwyer stated that Ms Hornberg, who worked as a “project costing officer” classified as an administrative officer level 3, has conceded she used the name “Helga” behind the co-worker’s back.
“The use of the name ‘Helga’ when referring to the co-worker in question is enough, of itself, to justify the sanction imposed,” he concluded.
The co-worker has either not been told about her Helga nickname or has not “sought to action it” with a complaint, and TMR managers who knew about the nickname and “Nein, Nein” comments but failed to manage it were “inept”, Mr Dwyer states in his decision.
He stated that the allegation that Ms Hornberg used the phrase “Nein, Nein” was not “particularly strong” but Ms Hornberg did not exercise her right to appeal that finding, so it would stand.
“Taking into account a permissive attitude or management ineptitude, it is plain from the evidence (including Ms Hornberg’s own concessions) that she was using the name ‘Helga’ discourteously and disrespectfully,” he wrote.
“So much is apparent from the fact that she did not use it when addressing the co-worker in question. Nicknames used in private are rarely compliments, and Ms Hornberg should not need a manager to tell her to refrain from such conduct,” he stated.
“There can be no doubt the choice of the name ‘Helga’ is a form of racial stereotyping.
“The deliberate choice of a name that has such evident Germanic roots, when used furtively with other co-workers and in the context of a somewhat fraught workplace relationship, unnecessarily draws attention to the race of the co-worker in question in a mocking way. “While Ms Hornberg insists this was not the case, her real intention is most plainly revealed by the fact that she used the name to refer to her co-worker, but not when addressing her.
“Witnesses interviewed during the investigation confirmed that Ms Hornberg had a clash with the co-worker in question over an entry in a time sheet, and that thereafter, Ms Hornberg appeared to treat the co-worker in question in a rude or abrupt manner,” Mr Dwyer wrote in his decision.
“There was ample evidence that Ms Hornberg could be difficult to work with, and that she appeared to have a difficult relationship with the co-worker in question,” he stated.
“To be fair to Ms Hornberg, it ought to be noted that other witnesses considered the co-worker in question to also be abrupt in her communication style.
“Additionally, a concerning number of the witnesses interviewed did not consider Ms Hornberg using the name ‘Helga’ as a reference to her co-worker to be offensive. These witnesses included a manager,” Mr Dwyer noted.
He stated that Ms Hornberg’s “willingness to use racial stereotyping” to deride her co-worker created a risk that her colleague could sue TMR for discrimination or claim workers compensation for injury or hurt and humiliation.
Ms Hornberg submitted to the QIRC that her conduct ought to have been dealt with by TMR as a “performance issue” at a local level instead of being escalated to a more serious “disciplinary issue”.
But Mr Dwyer concluded that this submission showed Ms Hornberg’s “troubling lack of insight … into the objective seriousness of her conduct” and the potential legal consequences for TMR of her admitted name-calling.
Although he found her actions discourteous and disrespectful, Mr Dwyer was “not entirely certain her intention was malicious”.
She was found to have breached the Queensland Public Service code of conduct requiring her to “treat co-workers with courtesy and respect”.
“There is nothing unfair or unreasonable about implementing a disciplinary process in the circumstances of this case,” Mr Dwyer stated.
“Despite some flaws in the investigation process, there was more than adequate evidence of the impugned conduct,” he wrote.
Ms Hornberg tried to challenge the substantiation of the “Helga” and “Nein, Nein” allegations in the QIRC arguing they were not based on “factual evidence”, but Mr Dwyer ruled that it was too late to appeal this and Ms Hornberg’s bid to overturn the substantiation of the misconduct was “fundamentally misconceived”.
