‘Humiliated’ transgender social worker wins $35k from NSW Health after being outed

A transgender social worker employed by the NSW Health Service has been awarded $35,000 in damages after he was forced to confirm his “dead names” to a colleague when being considered for a new job.

The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal’s Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division found the man suffered “indirect transgender discrimination” by his employer, the NSW Health Service.

The court was told the worker, who changed his first and middle name from “quintessential” female names to identifiably male names when he transitioned in 2012, received a call from a colleague in June 2023 to confirm the names he was given at birth.

The call, which he said left him feeling “humiliated”, came after he had applied for a temporary role within the NSW Health Service. He was unaware at the time that all internal job applicants were subject to a “Former Name Check Condition” and said he wasn’t warned that colleagues would see his former names, known as “dead names”, as part of the job application process.

The court was told that when he first joined NSW Health in 2020 he had no issue with supplying his former names, as they were needed to facilitate a National Police Check and to verify his Working with Children number.

But he was not told that colleagues would become aware of his birth names during any internal job application, effectively “outing” him as transgender against his will.

The man, who cannot be identified and is known only as HGY, gave evidence that his transgender status was a matter he shared with only a few people and not even his wife’s parents knew.

He told the tribunal he felt “sick to his stomach when considering that he could be outed, a fact that he is reminded of daily”.

“(HGY) says he feels angry, frustrated, and sad by the fact that in order to take another job in the NSW Health Service, he would be required to compromise his dignity and his privacy,” the tribunal members reported in their judgment.

The tribunal accepted that he had suffered mental health impacts as a result of the disclosure of his previous names, including difficulty breathing, elevated heart rates and difficulty managing the onset of panic attacks for days at a time.

Complying with the Former Name Check Condition “would create a real risk that he would be “outed” to others as a transgender man in his workplace”.

“We accept his evidence that for (HGY) to comply with the requirement, it would mean suffering significant and ongoing fear, stress, and anxiety that people in his workplace may discriminate against him, ask him invasive questions, spread gossip or even subject him to aggressive abuse,” the tribunal found.

“We also accept his evidence that for him to comply with the requirement, it would infringe his dignity and sense of personal privacy, which is a cost he is unable to bear. It would affect whether he would apply for internal positions if it would risk him being outed.”

The tribunal found that name checks were pointless for internal applicants like him, who had already passed police and working with children checks under the same name.

It also found that the checks could be done by a human resources unit without exposing people’s former names to workmates.

An expert witness, Dr Robin Ladwig, gave evidence at the hearing that the use of a former name was likely to cause significant distress to transgender people.

“The primary reasons why transgender and gender diverse people socially or formally change their name is for their self-affirmation including gender euphoria (a feeling of excitement, satisfaction and joy that occurs when a person’s gender expression aligns with their gender identity),” they testified.

“Even the use of a chosen name has positive effects on the mental health of transgender and gender diverse people as research links the use of a chosen name to reduced depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour among transgender youth.”

HGY was awarded $25,000 in damages and a further $10,000 in aggravated damages over the way the department fought the case, finding its submissions accusing the worker of not being “full and frank and honest” were “entirely without foundation” and would have caused him hurt and offence.

The tribunal declined to order changes to the NSW Health Service’s recruitment system, noting a review was already in train and that “change is on its way”.