This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

Australian Border Force staff experienced “alarming levels of sexual harassment and bullying”, discrimination, increasing militarisation, and a culture of nepotism and favouritism, an internal review obtained by Guardian Australia reveals.

The exhaustive review of ABF culture, also known as the May report, reveals some staff believed the agency was recruiting trainees who were “cowboys, too aggressive, and too keen to use weapons” after the 2015 amalgamation of customs and immigration.

It found serious failings in the agency’s culture and its treatment of women and diverse staff, after examining workplaces in five capital cities and surveying more than 700 employees.

The 2017 review, obtained by Guardian Australia through freedom of information laws, was commissioned by the sacked ABF commissioner, Roman Quaedvlieg. Quaedvlieg told Guardian Australia he had acted after hearing disturbing anecdotes about the treatment of female ABF employees as he walked through major airports, talking with staff.

“A woman – a low-level officer on the primary line processing passengers – was told to take a break … as she walked off a comment was made about ‘don’t give the boys blow jobs in the meal room’,” he said.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Former immigration minister Peter Dutton and then Australian Border Force commissioner Roman Quaedvlieg in 2015. Photograph: Dan Peled/AAP

“She said to me it was done tongue-in-cheek, there was no sort of innuendo that that was going to occur. But the very fact that a senior male officer can talk to junior female officers in that manner tells you there’s a cultural problem.”

The final report concluded unconscious bias and discriminatory practices were disproportionately impacting women, older employees, people from different ethnic backgrounds and people with a disability.

“Bias is perpetuated through stereotyping, allocation of work and development opportunities to people who ‘fit’ and/or are known to supervisors,” the report said.

“It is compounded by a lack of transparency, structural rigidity, an increasing military-like focus that informs decisions about ‘suitability’, sexual harassment and bullying.”

Key findings of the May report included:

Women experienced “alarming levels of sexual harassment and bullying”, with the highest levels of sexual harassment at Brisbane and Sydney, and of bullying at Brisbane and Melbourne.

Many staff did not feel recognised or valued and had little opportunity to contribute and innovate.

Career development and progression was hindered by insufficient training and a lack of transparency in processes, as well as decision-making “influenced by favouritism and nepotism”. More than half of staff said “knowing the right people” was a prerequisite for career progression.

Unconscious bias existed and was manifested through informal networks and consideration of promotions, “and privileges men and people ‘like us’.”

Staff in all locations reported not feeling safe speaking up, especially women, and those who did experienced penalties, it said.

54% women surveyed said the workplace was a “boys’ club” or gave only “lip service” to inclusiveness.

At all locations men lacked awareness of the experience of their female peers, the report said, with 50% indicating there were “no barriers to women”, compared to 15% of the surveyed women.

There have been multiple previous reports and leaks relating to a toxic internal culture at ABF, including other high reported rates of bullying and harassment.

Quaedvlieg was sacked in May, months before the report was completed, for failing to disclose his relationship with a woman he helped get a job at Sydney airport. He said he had received the interim findings before his sacking.

“Those findings were pretty shocking to me, to the point where I couldn’t wait for the final reviews and reports to be concluded,” Quaedvlieg said.

“I actually handed the interim findings to our corporate area and asked them to come up with some remediation strategies immediately to deal with what those interim findings were. And they were things in the realm of sexual harassment, or at least sexually harassing comments, innuendos, disadvantaging in the workplace, particularly towards women, but also to other minority groups.”

The partially redacted report included feedback from staff that the recruitment and promotion of border force officers focused on those with a military or policing background, and on those with a “particular style” for trainees.

It said some “appreciated this trend” but others felt the trainee choices were not appropriately suited or skilled, describing them as “cowboys, too aggressive and too keen to use weapons”.

Consistent across all locations was a finding that lower-level staff experienced collegiality and a sense of connection to their team members and immediate supervisors.

“Some managers recognised the value of a diverse and gender balanced workplace and were ‘actively seeking to foster inclusive practises’,” it said.

However, the recruitment of trainees for the newly formed Australian Border Force and a perception of “militarisation” of the workplace culture was “creating an ‘us’ and ‘them’ divide between the young, fit, and perceived ‘aggressive’ new recruits and older, long-term employees with more experience”, it said.

Quaedvlieg said he believed concerns about militarisation were used as a cover by longer-term employees who were reluctant to change.

“I think they used that as code for ‘we don’t like the new changes, because we’ve already run things the way that we wanted them to run,” he said. “I think they used the code ‘militarisation’ to cover up what they didn’t want to actually implement.”

Staff told the May report there was no understanding of the pressure they were under, and that support for work-life balance was inconsistent, leading to discouragement and exhaustion.

The report was the result of five separate reviews conducted between November 2016 and April 2017 at Brisbane, Perth, Melbourne, Sydney and Strategic Border Command.

In Perth the report highlighted “significant ‘us and them’ dynamics” between former employees of customs and former employees of Immigration, and a “boys club culture” perpetuated through male dominated supervisor levels and informal networks.

Auditor report finds significant failings in fleet used to intercept asylum seekers Read more

In Melbourne the review found “substantial bias against women with family commitments, in particular those working part time”, and in Sydney staff with injuries were ostracised and not accommodated.

In June this year the Australian National Audit Office released a damning review into the customs and immigration amalgamation, finding it failed to bring the promised budget savings and was beset by poor record keeping and high turnover.

ABF was contacted for comment. It referred to a previous statement by the current commissioner, Michael Outram, about the May report. That statement acknowledged the agency was “not immune to the issues of workplace bullying and harassment”.

“As I have stated publicly before, these behaviours will not be tolerated within the ABF,” Outram said. “Where they are identified, we will take swift action to hold those responsible accountable and to support those who are subjected to these kinds of behaviours.”

The agency has established a cultural taskforce, held a series of meetings, created a more representative and diverse leadership team, and launched a long-term plan to achieve “meaningful change”. It has also developed a “speak safe” initiative to allow officers to openly discuss such issues.