Covid Vaccines and Pilots
you mightbe under the misconceptiion the legal world is exactly as it appears to the laymen and is simple and straightforward. It isnt. So to spell it out if the policy is introduced improperly then it possibly has no grounds and anyone sacked mightve been sacked wrongfuly and been discriminated against. A employer mandate esp one brung in improperly is compleetly different to an SOP.
having said that if an errent SOP is brought in which pilots believe has potential to lead to undesired aircraft state or outcome or simillar and pilots refuse to comply and raise a stink and you were cheif pilot do you still expect them to comply? but its an SOP!
Having said all that the senator is trying to upgrade an anti discrimination act or whatever. not so long ago if you prefered the company of other men youd be sacked and more. where do you draw the line Dre.? Whose okay to discrimintate against and who isnt? who died and left you in charge?
Having said all that and assuming thr courts find in favour of the defenedents in each case the one guy who had cancer and said hed comply when he was through with treatment and still sacked....... how do you justify that Dre? seems pretty tough. standing up against someone elses personal decision on a jab that doesnt even work. Your a tough man, Dr Dre! well at least on here.
thats a funny way of looking at it. i think Roberts could find a lot more votes if he went mainstream on his views woudnt you say? seems to be taking the hard road, maybe he believes in something else, no not the tooth fairy, not area 51, im talking about ethics. maybe his motoivation is different to some of the other pollies. what could it be?
The following users liked this post:
thats a funny way of looking at it. i think Roberts could find a lot more votes if he went mainstream on his views woudnt you say? seems to be taking the hard road, maybe he believes in something else, no not the tooth fairy, not area 51, im talking about ethics. maybe his motoivation is different to some of the other pollies. what could it be?
But only 6 votes out of 76 in the Senate will ensure that type of legislation has zero chance of ever getting up.
So despite our spelling challenged mate’s assertions, vaccine mandates are legal and will not be overruled by legislation.
do you also work for Quantas? if so you may already know the in' s and out' s of the contract. have you seen the claus for jabs made retrospecitivly mandatry? maybe such jabs must be on ' reasonable " grounds, maybe such changes must be discussed with the employee group prier to implimnetation. maybe there IS no claus. other companys (a few not all) are finding this out in court.
you mightbe under the misconceptiion the legal world is exactly as it appears to the laymen and is simple and straightforward. It isnt. So to spell it out if the policy is introduced improperly then it possibly has no grounds and anyone sacked mightve been sacked wrongfuly and been discriminated against. A employer mandate esp one brung in improperly is compleetly different to an SOP.
you mightbe under the misconceptiion the legal world is exactly as it appears to the laymen and is simple and straightforward. It isnt. So to spell it out if the policy is introduced improperly then it possibly has no grounds and anyone sacked mightve been sacked wrongfuly and been discriminated against. A employer mandate esp one brung in improperly is compleetly different to an SOP.
I don’t believe in the tooth fairy, nor Area 51. But at least I’m not a massive on-record racist like Malcom Roberts.
Nope I've had three Vax and never again no more, no masks no quarantine, no border closures. It's just a flu people! Nothing should have been mandatory, no lockdowns and no criminalising it. A total **** fight it was with idiots in State and Federal Parliament making it up as they went.
The following users liked this post:
Nope I've had three Vax and never again no more, no masks no quarantine, no border closures. It's just a flu people! Nothing should have been mandatory, no lockdowns and no criminalising it. A total **** fight it was with idiots in State and Federal Parliament making it up as they went.
No, me neither...
Nope I've had three Vax and never again no more, no masks no quarantine, no border closures. It's just a flu people! Nothing should have been mandatory, no lockdowns and no criminalising it. A total **** fight it was with idiots in State and Federal Parliament making it up as they went.
The following users liked this post:
Nope I've had three Vax and never again no more, no masks no quarantine, no border closures. It's just a flu people! Nothing should have been mandatory, no lockdowns and no criminalising it. A total **** fight it was with idiots in State and Federal Parliament making it up as they went.
The following 4 users liked this post by Wizofoz:
The following 5 users liked this post by Ollie Onion:
There s many many opinions out there to the efect that mandates were a bad idea, here in aus and a broad. i would only rely on the qualifiied ones myself. If you dont want "infowars " whatever that is then whos opinoin WOULD you accept ? you dont seem to want to understand that jus because the machine shuts down a highly qaulified expert in the feild that doesnt mean hes wrong or a quack. yesterday he or she was a respected proffessional, today shuned because he /she didnt agree with the agenda. there 's a huge diference in those 2 scenarios. Why dont you like hearing it? look up congitive disonannce. see if it fits your outlook. Just trying to help./
Some trying to refight battles already fought and lost.
Covid was a problem.
The vaccine overcame that problem.
Mandates were legal and those who chose to not comply with them will not get their jobs back no matter how hard Malcolm Roberts tries.
Covid was a problem.
The vaccine overcame that problem.
Mandates were legal and those who chose to not comply with them will not get their jobs back no matter how hard Malcolm Roberts tries.
The following users liked this post:
The Sydney Trains case regarded backpay and leave entitlements for those who were stood down in accordance with the policy, it was ruling on the HR processes involved. Not the mandate itself and the Commssion made that clear in the case.
Legal cases in Australia arguing unfair dismissal and challenging mandates themselves have been unsuccessful in multiple industries.
Legal cases in Australia arguing unfair dismissal and challenging mandates themselves have been unsuccessful in multiple industries.
"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.
& 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."
Also the recent teacher one.
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...accine-mandate
Now, what was the incidence of death and serious illness in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated? Answer, FAR higher (like a factor of ten) among the unvaccinated.
The fact that you ask the question means you absorb distorted figures from partisan sources.