Love her or loathe her, Charlotte Dawson has used her public profile to raise awareness about mental illness. Ms Dawson's past public battle with social media trolls took a toll on her own mental health, resulting in her being hospitalised. Glossy magazine covers didn't miss a (heart) beat. Recently Ms Dawson was hospitalised again, but this time someone else paid attention.
You'd think her agent would be licking its trout-pout lips. Any publicity is good publicity right? Afraid not. Last week she publicly clashed with her agent Chic Management. Chic Management allegedly stated that Ms Dawson's brand was being negatively affected by her stays in hospital and her public, yet confronting insights into her personal life. Rumour has it that, as a result, Chic Management may cut its ties with Ms Dawson.
Not sounding right? We didn't think so. In fact, terminating a contract such as Ms Dawson's for reasons including her mental illness could constitute unlawful discrimination.
Mental illness falls within the operation of both State and Federal anti-discrimination legislation, meaning that you cannot discriminate against a person on the basis of their mental illness in the course of employment. The protection also extends beyond traditional employment arrangements into other areas such as contractors, employment agencies, and goods and services.
What about the agent's right to ensure that it only represents talent with a personal brand aligned with its own? It's a valid interest, but when the line is drawn at the point of hospitalisation due to mental illness the agent ought to proceed with caution in light of the anti-discrimination legislation. That's a magazine cover headline you don't want.
We do not disclaim anything about this article. We're quite proud of it really.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.