"I never wanted to be a crusader - I just wanted to be a policeman".

An interview with Michael Flannery - whose case was the first to be heard by the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Tribunal

Michael Flannery lodged a complaint of discrimination on the grounds of impairment in pre-employment with the Commission. His case was the first to be heard by the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Tribunal sitting in April 1993. The case of Michael John Flannery v James Patrick O'Sullivan for many reasons deserves a special place in the history of discrimination law in Queensland.

The Case
The facts of the case are that Mr Flannery had worked as a custodial corrections officer for some years. With the closure of Boggo Road Prison, he was made redundant. At 40 years of age, he decided to make an application to the Police Service. As a result of tests and interviews, he was ranked 47th out of a field of 2,694 applicants. A total of 150 recruits were required. However, he failed the eyesight standard. Mr Flannery is short-sighted and he was refused entry because his eyesight without contact lenses did not meet the standards set for new recruits.

When I spoke recently to Mr Flannery about how he felt when he was turned down as a police recruit because of his impairment, he used words like "shattered", "so stupid and unfair". He explained that he had worn contact lenses for the previous ten years and been involved in active sports such as rugby league, squash and surf life saving. During his time as a custodial corrections officer he was involved in altercations with prisoners, including one occasion when he was punched in the eye. At no time were his contact lenses disturbed.

There was also a certain irony to the rejection. When he was a young man around 20 years of age he had applied to join the Police Service. At that stage his eyesight would not have been an obstacle, but he did not meet the height requirements of the day. The sense of irony was heightened when the Tribunal heard that the eyesight standard was not applied at any point after recruitment and that serving officers could wear contact lenses or spectacles.

In taking his case to the Tribunal Mr Flannery was embarking on the unknown. Lawyers could only guess at outcomes. It was uncertain whether if successful, costs would be awarded, and while he believed he had a strong case, nothing was certain.

When Mr Flannery’s legal representation changed from a private firm tothe Legal Aid Office, he collected masses of information on eyesight standards from other Police Services - in Australia and overseas, the Federal Police, defence forces and ambulance service, and sought out academics in the field of optometry.

It had taken determination and courage and a lot of hard work to pursue his rights under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 , and in speaking of this period the words he used were "daunting", "pressure", "frustration", "anxiety" and "unknown". The whole process had taken two years of his life, a time of great uncertainty for himself, his wife and two school age children .

In speaking with Mr Flannery of this time, he conceded "This wasn't an easy road". When questioned about what advice he would give a person thinking of making a complaint , he said that the first thing is to "establish that you've got a legitimate case, and not just disappointed that things didn't turn out the way you wanted them to…Then you have to decide that you're going to do something about it and be prepared to put in the hard yards….If you do the hard work, then you've got a chance."

The outcome
The outcome of the case was that Member Atkinson found in favour of Mr Flannery, and ordered that "the respondent take whatever steps that are necessary to admit Mr Flannery as a police recruit." For the purposes of calculating superannuation and long service leave entitlements, his starting date was backdated to the date when he would have been admitted as a police recruit had he not been subject to the discrimination complained of.

Senior Constable Flannery is today a serving officer with the Queensland Police Service. He is attached to the Railway Squad which works to make the railway system safe for the public. For five years he worked at a suburban Police station and also took a secondment to Murgon for a time. There is no ill feeling about the battle he had to be accepted as a recruit. He said "My fight was more with the GMO [Government Medical Officer] who set the eyesight standards, than the QPS who abided by them." In commenting about his place in history as the first case Senior Constable Flannery said "I never wanted to be a crusader or change the world. I just wanted to be a policeman……One thing I suppose is that it has made me more appreciative of my employment in the QPS. I can honestly say that I have never felt that all the effort wasn't worthwhile."

index of this newsletter