Originally Posted by
blubak
Its also hilarious that the so called COO Colin Hughes is claiming the workforce would have remained stood down during 2021( that part is true) & then goes on to say they wouldnt have been paid.
He in his wisdom has conveniently forgotten that Qantas would have been receiving jobkeeper payments from the govt to pass on to every employee.
Where does this company get these high flying executives from that constantly embarrass themselves every time their lips move.
It is obviously lost on you but both Mr Mc Intosh (TWU) and Mr Hughes (Qantas) are giving evidence on the basis of “ what would you have done” with the implication of what would it be if Covid hadn’t happened. They all refer to the evidence as “ counterfactual”
The case is all about compensation.
Qantas is saying: “ we would have retrenched you after 12 months in any case” so we are willing to pay 12 months pay as compensation.
The 3 TWU members are saying that they would have stayed working for Qf for the rest of their lives so compensation should be for the rest of the individuals working career.
As a consequence the arguments so far are about what would have happened. Strange, but that is what the evidence is all about.
The word “ counterfactual” is thrown about like confetti. The judge frequently uses the words” but for” which I guess means: “ what do you think would have happened but for……