Gay University Student Loses Discrimination Complaint Against Sydney Uni Over Religious School Placement

A gay university student has had his discrimination case against Macquarie University thrown out by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Simon Margan claimed that he was discriminated against by the university who placed him at a religious school for his teaching practical placement.

However the tribunal disagreed, refusing his complaint of homosexual discrimination and victimisation to proceed to a full hearing.

Gay University Student Loses Complaint Case

In October 2022 Simon Margan, a gay university student, was assigned a placement with a catholic school in NSW for his three week teaching placement by Macquarie University.

Following the placement Mr Margan lodged the complaint against the University making claims that they ignored his complaints of discrimination and harassment by the school staff whilst on his placement.

He further alleged that the university failed to reassign him or withdraw from the course without penalty, failed to handle the complaint appropriately and caused him “additional detriment” by informing the school of his grievances whilst he was still on placement.

Mr Margan claimed that following his complaints the university initiated a “fitness to practice” process against him when he was given an unsatisfactory grade for his placement.

In his complaint Mr Margan claimed that being placed in a faith based school as an LGBTQIA+ person was “dangerous” and stated that it was a “notorious fact” that religious schools were opposed to LGBTQIA+ rights.

However on Friday the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal declined to allow the complaints against the organisation to proceed any further.

Deputy President of NCAT, Acting Judge Nancy Hennessy stated “The conduct which Mr Margan has identified as being detrimental to him as a homosexual person or which he perceives as being unfair, dangerous or done in retribution for complaining, is lacking in substance.”

“Contrary to Mr Margan’s submission, there is no duty of care under the Anti-Discrimination Act for the University to take ’every reasonable precaution to prevent the reasonably foreseeable harm” of being placed in a Catholic school’.”

Details of the decision allege that Mr Margan did not explicitly state his preference for a placement beyond one that would be accessible by public transport and that he was “never asked if he objected to being placed in a religious school.”

Further published details from the decision state that “He asserts that he has made numerous representations about his homosexuality and his objections to a placement in a religious school.”

“As he was only told about the placement five days before it started, he had no practical opportunity to object and the University made no attempt to establish whether a Catholic school was a problem for him as a homosexual man.”

The tribunal found that both complaints lodged by Mr Margan “lacked substance” as reasons for not allowing his complaint to proceed any further.

“The conduct which Mr Margan has identified as being detrimental to him as a homosexual person or which he perceives as being unfair, dangerous or done in retribution for complaining, is lacking in substance,” Judge Hennessy said.

“There is nothing about being a homosexual person that affects their ability to communicate preferences.”

However in a win for Mr Margan it was decided that he had not been provided with enough opportunity to be able to withdraw from unit once he became aware of the circumstances of his placement, it was also determined that he adequate feedback had not been provided to him for the duration of his placement. As a result he has now been allowed to withdraw from the unit without penalty.