Originally Posted by
Xeptu
I can see the argument for application of common law where the matter falls outside of that which legislation applies as is the case in this instance. Then it would come down to a lawful and reasonable direction and I think that's where the issue is given where the vaccine was at the time the mandate was made, if in fact there has been such a mandate.
It will make for an interesting legal argument, not one that will be decided in the FWA.
Further: Given vaccinations fall under health as a medical procedure, I doubt it will or would have been deemed lawful and reasonable.
Lawful and reasonable are legal concepts backed by case law. It is not what you may think is ‘reasonable’. I don’t agree with your assessment that something that is a health issue falls outside ‘lawful and reasonable’, as complying with a work health and safety requirement is certainly a criteria that would put a direction ‘lawful and reasonable’.