A ‘malicious’ email sent to all employees of one of Australia’s leading workplace law firms on Friday has been referred to the police.
The email, which was purportedly sent by outgoing Slater + Gordon chief people officer Mari Ruiz-Matthyssen, brutally critiqued the personality flaws of the company’s leaders, detailing who was ‘disloyal’, ‘useless’, ‘a gossip’ and ‘lazy’.
On Sunday, chief executive Dina Tutungi announced that the company would conduct an internal ‘forensic investigation’ to find out the the origins of the email.
The law firm’s cyber incident team is also working on the case.
The firm reiterated on Sunday that the email was not penned by its outgoing HR boss.
‘The email was not sent by the interim chief people officer Mari Ruiz-Matthyssen. It contains many disparaging, false, and deliberately misleading claims,’ Ms Tutungi said in a statement to The Australian.
‘The information attached to the email, while unreliable, should never have been shared.’
Ms Tutungi added that both the firm and Ms Ruiz-Matthyssen have made formal complaints to police.
On Sunday, Slater + Gordon CEO Dina Tutungi (pictured) said the company would conduct a ‘forensic investigation’
‘The malicious email that was sent to our employees on Friday by someone impersonating a staff member was an invasion of privacy and I apologise to everyone affected by it,’ she said.
‘We understand the upset and distress this has caused, and we are conducting a forensic investigation to find out how this occurred.
‘I want to assure all of our employees that they will be provided every support possible.’
She added that the company was ‘fully committed to supporting our staff through this time, and meeting all our legal and regulatory obligations, including the reporting of privacy breaches and any necessary compliance steps’.
‘Our Cyber Incident Response Team has been stood up and a thorough forensic investigation is being conducted, supported by external specialists,’ Ms Tutungi said.
‘We will have more to say when we know more … We are committed to upholding the strong culture and values of this firm, and we will not allow this act to distract from the important work we do for our clients.’
It’s understood Slater + Gordon held multiple emergency staff meetings in the wake of the email being sent on Friday, which caused great distress to a large number of staff.
The email, which was sent from a gmail address, described Slater + Gordon as ‘textbook case of dysfunction’.
Slater + Gordon (signage pictured) said the email’s claims were untrue and a work of fiction
Titled ‘CPO Handover’ and addressed to a human resources head at a university law school believed to be taking over the firm’s top HR job, it also claimed to include an authentic attachment running through the salaries and bonus packages for the firm’s staffers.
A Slater + Gordon spokesman told Daily Mail Australia that Ms Ruiz-Matthyssen denied writing or sending the email and that the matter was being fully investigated.
‘The interim Chief People Officer is not the author or the sender of that email, nor is that email address attributed to her, and she intends to report this matter to the police,’ a spokesperson said on Friday night.
‘The contents of the email include a range of disparaging remarks about individuals – what is presented as internal information in the email is incorrect and in many ways a work of fiction.
‘We are taking this seriously due to the distress this has caused many of our team and are investigating the matter. We will also cooperate fully with any police action or investigation.’
The email, which was blind copied to all staff at the firm and landed in their inboxes on Friday morning, immediately went viral within Australia’s legal fraternity.
It shocked many with its startling takedown of key staffers, suggesting whoever composed the message had an intimate knowledge of the firm’s inner-workings.
‘As promised when we met the week before last, I’m sending you the handover I wish I had before I arrived,’ the email said.
‘As you know, I am finishing up this week. I had reached out to the previous CPO on LinkedIn before I started – no response.
‘Once I was briefed on the situation, I understood why. I assume Dina has already filled you in on the ongoing legal case.’
Slater + Gordon is investigating an email brutally critiquing the personality flaws of the company’s key staffers
The passage is a reference to Ms Ruiz-Matthyssen’s predecessor, Alicia Gleeson, who is currently suing the firm in the Federal Court.
She alleges she was sacked after raising concerns the company was deliberately miscalculating staff leave entitlements.
Ms Ruiz-Matthyssen replaced Ms Gleeson as Chief People Officer of Slater + Gordon on an interim basis in September 2024, and is billed as ‘an emotionally intelligent Executive’ on the firm’s website.
The email noted that she was the fifth person to take the position in as many years.
‘To be blunt, the situation at Slater and Gordon is a textbook case of dysfunction,’ the email continued.
‘I sincerely hope you can make a difference, though given you’ll be the fifth person in this role in five years, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
‘The entrenched negative towards HR is alive and well.’
The email proceeded to disparage Ms Tutungi while suggesting she felt threatened by some key staffers while deriding others as lazy.
Daily Mail Australia is not suggesting any of the claims in the email were made by Ms Ruiz-Matthyssen nor that she sent the email, nor that they are true – only that they were sent to all staff.
‘Dina’s primary focus is her own bottom line,’ the email said, amid a string of other accusations and allegations to contentious to publish.
‘She’s determined to maximise her bonus and is laser-focused on keeping salaries locked down.
‘If you’re lucky, you’ll get an invite to a…dinner at Dina’s mansion – complete with its own website [and] private chef.
‘Last time… it fizzled by 8.30pm. No-one could leave fast enough. But hey, maybe you’ll enjoy it.’
The blistering email was blind copied to all staff at the firm and landed in their inbox on Friday morning
The email goes on to say that Allegro Funds, which completed a successful off-market takeover of the firm in April 2023, ‘is gutting the place’.
‘Heads are rolling, and what remains is a skeletal crew barely keeping things together. The endgame? A polished up shell to be sold off at the right price.’
The email then goes on to detail the internal grievances and personality flaws of the firm’s ‘key players’ while offer a snapshot of the alleged ‘office dynamics’.
Another staffer who has ‘battled cancer’ was said to be earmarked for the axe because ‘she’s lazy’ but there was a need to ‘tread carefully given the history’.
Yet another employee was described as ‘pleasant’ but potentially ‘disloyal’ and ‘clearly anxious about the current instability’.
As the list of perceived weaknesses continued, the incoming HR boss was further warned that one senior staffer had ‘three formal complainants of inappropriate conduct’ levelled against him only for the issue to be ‘buried’.
The emailed warned there was a need to be wary of one particular employee, saying: ‘Watch out for her. She will do anything to distance herself from any accountability.’
As for the CEO herself? Well, she was not safe either, according to the email.
‘Allegro had me assess Dina’s “capabilities”,’ the author claims in the email.
Another employee were described variously as ‘opinionated, combative and overqualified’, another as ‘seems lazy and unmotivated’ while a different staffer was said to be ‘the king of kicking the can down the road (and) incredibly lazily but holds all access, so gets away with it’.
Indeed, only a rare few members of the team weren’t described as ‘lazy’ – with one employee described as ‘ambitious, bright, capable’, one more as ‘great, does the job’ and a third as ‘very good at his job, (a) seasoned professional.’
The email rounds off by claiming the HR team is not even sure why one key staffer is even working with the firm ‘to be honest’ as they are ‘a little draining’.
It is not clear what motivated the email, although the law firm said answering that question would be a key part of its immediate investigation.
