A market research interviewer sacked after calling a survey respondent a “joker” and likening them to Ivan Milat says there’s more to the story, and that she never should’ve lost her job.

Chrissie Purdy, a 66-year-old Melburnian, was fired by The Social Research Centre (SRC) in August 2024 following a heated phone exchange with a member of the public.

The call took place on July 29, 2024, when Purdy rang a member of the public to conduct a survey on behalf of the SRC.

Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today

A recording of the conversation captured her making a series of confrontational and personal remarks.

The call that cost the job

“You are going to give me rubbish answers aren’t you,” the transcript recorded her as saying.

“We don’t have to do the survey — obviously I don’t want to do it with you.”

Purdy was recorded making a string of personal comments.

“You sound like an obnoxious teenager who is bored and using us for entertainment,” she claimed.

“If you are that stupid that you’re going to tell people those [personal] details ... [laughs] — Seriously!

“You’re a joker aren’t you. You’re a joker, aren’t you?

“I’d rather speak to a nice person that lets me finish a sentence.

“You just want to screw me around.”

At one point, she compared the respondent to Australia’s most notorious serial killer Ivan Milat, who murdered seven backpackers in the 1990s.

“Ivan Milat? You know he was diagnosed as a psychopath and I think you are too,” she said over the phone.

Milat, known as Australia’s most prolific serial killer, infamously kidnapped and murdered at least seven young backpackers between 1989 and 1992, dumping their bodies in Belanglo State Forest.

Toward the end of the call, she appeared to defend herself, saying: “Why would I give you my surname? Are you going to stalk me, are you?”

“I’ve been doing this for 15 years and I’m going to go now. Bye,” she said, before hanging up the phone.

The SRC said Purdy’s conduct amounted to serious misconduct and breached company policy, and fired her.

‘Out of context’

Purdy argued the excerpt was “out of context”, as it didn’t capture what the man was saying to her.

“It was a seven-minute call — five minutes of me staying professional and trying to calm him down, because he just kept talking over me,” she told www.20304050.best.

She said the man appeared convinced she was a scammer, despite her explaining she was conducting the survey on behalf of a legitimate client — primarily health departments and other government agencies.

“It sounded like he thought it was his civic duty to tell off a scammer. So, he kept me on the phone to abuse me,” Purdy said.

When she told him that if he didn’t want to do the survey she could hang up, he allegedly became aggressive, repeatedly saying: “Don’t you dare hang up on me, I’m not done with you.”

Fearing the man might contact her company’s client to complain — which she said would have been “the worst thing” — Purdy said she tried to remain polite throughout the call.

“I thought, do I have to sit here and suck this up and just put up with him yelling at me?”

Eventually, she lost patience.

“The last two minutes I lost my patience and I ... got a bit sarcastic,” she said.

Purdy said the man kept accusing her of trying to get his personal details, and wouldn’t let her speak.

“I wanted to tell him that scammers ask for names, addresses, bank numbers, credit cards — and we don’t do any of that. But I couldn’t get a word in, he just kept talking over me.”

According to Purdy, the man then said: “You’re gonna ask me my name, you’re gonna ask me my details.”

When she denied it, he replied: “Alright then, I’ll tell you. My name is Ivan Milat.”

That, she said, prompted her to respond: “Ivan Milat? You know he was diagnosed as a psychopath and I think you are too.”

“So, there was a lot that I did say, but my employers just took out the bits they thought were the worst,” Purdy said.

Too late for justice

In 16 years at the SRC, Purdy says it was only the third time she had dealt with such an aggressive respondent.

In previous cases, a supervisor would typically step in.

Purdy assumed this situation would be handled the same way — until her name never appeared on the roster again.

The FWC’s report recorded she was in denial about being let go and thought the SRC would eventually call her back for more shifts.

That didn’t happen.

She was let go at 65 — just two years shy of qualifying for the full pension — which she said “really annoyed” her.

As a divorced woman with no children, the job was her lifeline.

Looking back, Purdy said she now regrets taking that shift — she was still grieving her mother’s death two months earlier and was caught up in a stressful family dispute at the time.

But with shifts already being cut back, she said she couldn’t afford to cancel any work.

Emotionally and mentally drained, she did not pursue any action until “things finally settled” in May this year.

She filed an unfair dismissal application with the FWC in June, but what she did not realise was — it was too late.

The application came 295 days, or nearly 10 months, after she was let go.

“Unfair dismissal applications are required to be made within 21 days of the dismissal taking effect,” the FWC decision stated.

The commission acknowledged it’s common for people to be unaware of the time limit, but ultimately dismissed her other reasons for the delay.

As a result, her claim was struck out, and she failed to get her job back.

Struggling, but hopeful

Now 66, Purdy says the fight to find work again feels even harder.

“Who’s gonna hire a 66-year-old now? I’ve been applying for jobs. They ask you about your birth date, and then you never hear from them.”

“No one will admit to ageism in the workforce, but that is what’s going on.”

Despite struggling financially and having no immediate family to lean on, she hopes her case can serve as a reminder to others about the 21-day cut-off.

She’s still holding on to hope.

“I’m struggling right now, but in a year’s time, everything will be all right when I get on the full pension,” she said.

The SRC has been contacted for comment.

Based in Melbourne, the SRC is a social research provider owned by the Australian National University.

It conducts large-scale survey and evaluation work for government departments and academic institutions.

While the organisation frequently conducts legitimate surveys on behalf of government and other institutions, it has received a low rating of 1.9 on Google Maps, with many reviewers describing its calls as spam or alleging scam-like behaviour.