Covid-19 Welcome to Freedom

I don't see why leaky vaccines should be mandatory, let alone ones with an already poor safety record.

Also, how can state governments overrule the federal government? Scomo needs to grow a spine!
 
American labour org says you wouldn’t win a case against mandatory vaccination:

 

Michael Corleone

Senior List
Sep 30, 2021
168
249
AFL Club
Fremantle
American labour org says you wouldn’t win a case against mandatory vaccination:

Quite clear why no one is a member of a union any more.
 
They do such a good job of it they continue to lose members and political power!
Political parties in Australia are losing members. Couple of pissy little right wing ones are picking up a small base.4

That's why the culture wars exist, to rile up the conservatives to get involved.
 
They do such a good job of it they continue to lose members and political power!
But why does this legal advice show why unions are losing members?

If members don't understand the union cannot unilaterally change the law, then I suppose yeah the union isn't educating them well enough.
 
Apr 23, 2016
30,510
42,672
AFL Club
Essendon
It's hard for unions to succeed when there has been a long term, sustained push by capital to render them worthless and irrelevant.

Also unions like the CFMEU don't exactly inspire people to think positively about unionising.

I know plenty of tradies who don't like how the CFMEU operate.
 
May 27, 2017
6,351
9,773
AFL Club
St Kilda
Is it to protect health services? This could be counterproductive given that many health workers remain non-vaccinated and would have to drop out of the workforce.

I'd say it's largely to protect health services.

The industry as a whole will give a big fat middle finger to the people who leave due to not getting vaccinated.

Scott Morrison announced international travel to resume in November, bet you that includes visa's for health care workers. Vaccinated ones of course.
 
But why does this legal advice show why unions are losing members?
The strength and value of unions has always found it's base in the dismissing of existing legal framework to demand a better outcome for their members.

Your position on this might be different if there was a law signed in that allowed employers to require their staff to work an extra 10 hours a week unpaid when the business was declared in financial trouble - this declaration also protects the business from paying staff entitlements they are owed and allowing the business to dismiss staff who aren't on board with the team to try and dig out of their financial issue.

The union says "well that's the law, oh well"

For what it's worth I think businesses have been trying to lean on the federal government for a while to get them to bring in a mandatory vaccine, but they don't want to wear that. The businesses have been pushing it because the state governments hold the threat of lockdown and capacity limits over their business.

Implementing the framework to invalidate members of society for not consenting to a medical procedure won't ever lead to anything unexpected.
 
dismissing of existing legal framework to demand a better outcome for their members.

Your position on this might be different if there was a law signed in that allowed employers to require their staff to work an extra 10 hours a week unpaid when the business was declared in financial trouble
I didn't see anything in there that said they would or would not challenge the law.

Your example is nothing at all like the pandemic, so my opposition to something like that would be consistent.

invalidate members of society
Pretty dramatic.
 
I didn't see anything in there that said they would or would not challenge the law.

Your example is nothing at all like the pandemic, so my opposition to something like that would be consistent.


Pretty dramatic.
The pandemic has allowed the removal of what would have been a freedom of personal choice for the benefit of the big machine, many of them in fact.

Does someone need to require to you submit to a prostate examination before you draw a line? Especially when we are talking about a vaccine which is failing to protect a health system which was failing prior to the pandemic and now those people who created that situation are digging us out in a way that isn't fixing the primary issue.

But it is creating a politically useful subclass of citizens that can wear the burden of the failure.
 
The pandemic has allowed the removal of what would have been a freedom of personal choice for the benefit of the big machine, many of them in fact.
I’m sure it has. Unfortunately that freedom of choice is also killing people.

I don’t support blanket mandates for employees, but sorry there are some jobs that require vaccination now. No question.
 
Oct 21, 2012
2,164
3,945
Melbourne
AFL Club
Adelaide
There’s already precedent in Victoria, with flu vaccinations being mandatory for healthcare workers in pre-Covid times.

 

Pancakes

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2006
1,881
1,332
Everywhere
AFL Club
West Coast
There's a couple of legal actions been launched.

The first Victorian legal challenge to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for teachers has been issued in court. Self-represented casual relief teacher Belinda Cetnar and horticulturalist Jack Cetnar have gone to the Supreme Court to argue the no jab, no work policy is not legally or ethically justified, undermines the rule of law and is inconsistent with their human rights.

The government would love this case being the first one.
These clowns are self represented, and have almost zero chance of winning their case. After this precedence will be set and future ruling judges can just fall back on the decision in this case.

If the first case was a actual case with an actual legal team with resources behind them they may have stood a chance, but these two are giving the government exactly what they would want.
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
29,608
38,560
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
I agree that they most likely won't win and it was a mistake to self represent. I don't know much precedence will arise from it.

I found the the comments from Josh Bornstein interesting. He said it is likely that courts will uphold employer orders compelling employees to be vaccinated. And employers who didn’t ensure their workers were vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of that failure, people became sick or died.

Does this imply that employers who compel employees to be vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of the vaccine, people became sick or died?

Sueing the gov rarely ends well.
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
29,608
38,560
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
Josh Bornstein seems a bit muddled. The vaccine mandates are State Government measures. But he's talking about employers being liable.

If employers are liable for people getting sick by failing to apply vaccine mandates then they would also be liable for people getting sick by applying vaccine mandates.

Councils doing it too.

However they have fired many staff already or wfh
 
Back