Originally Posted by
Bend alot
If you read the full decision - This is what was said.
"I am not prepared, in the absence of appropriate evidence, to simply conclude that the Policy is reasonable and/or lawful or proportionate as a workplace health and safety response to the risks presented by COVID 19.
There was no appropriate evidence presented in the case because the mandate itself was not on trial. A judge will not make a judgement on something that isn’t relevant to the case or isn’t even part of the case.
& This
"However, I also give significant weight to the fact that a vaccination policy such as that included in the Policy intrudes on one’s right to bodily integrity if it is complied with. The practical effect of the Policy is to place pressure on an employee to give up this fundamental right, given that non-compliance is accompanied by potential disciplinary consequences that include termination of employment. This weighs against the Policy being assessed as reasonable."
Of course a vaccine mandate intrudes on bodily integrity. That doesn’t mean it isn’t legal, the judge himself said that mandates are reasonable actions.
We already surrender bodily autonomy. It is a requirement for a pilot holding a class 1 medical to submit a part of their body (their blood) to the government every several years to see if their cholesterol and sugar levels aren’t so high as to indicate a medical problem. In this case the right to bodily autonomy is overruled by the greater r interests of safety.
That person had a medical exemption that was apparently not considered, and the payout was related to improper consultation and process. The judge did not make a ruling on the legality of the mandate itself. The case also noted the teacher could work remotely as a factor in the judgement, which is not an option for most airline workers.
As the links I posted above show there were several cases challenging the mandates themselves, in those case the judges upheld the mandates as being reasonable and in compliance with all the applicable laws.