Opinion Non-Crows AFL 4: The Centre Cannot Hold

[1970crow]

I guess he could test it in the courts.




Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Which BHP just did and lost.

 

[Geoffa32]

Which BHP just did and lost.

Wasn't the main basis of that decision a lack of communicating the policy to employees? Not necessarily the policy itself

FWC Full Bench finds BHP vaccine mandate unreasonable due to lack of…

BHP has become the first Australian company to have its vaccine mandate overturned, following a Fair Work Commission Full Bench decision.

hallandwilcox.com.au

Yes other factors, I think the most relevant here is ability to work from home. As he, and the media, have done in this COVID era.

A media company could argue that staff do spend a lot of time in the community and thus exposed. Therefore it is their duty to protect employees, such a mandate does that. Mandates are generally blanket across a business. Education/Health department, all staff must be vaccinated. Not just teachers/medical staff. Includes non core administrative roles.



Hopefully someone does test this in court in SA, as a decision made in a NSW is not binding in SA.





Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[1970crow]

Wasn't the main basis of that decision a lack of communicating the policy to employees? Not necessarily the policy itself

FWC Full Bench finds BHP vaccine mandate unreasonable due to lack of…

BHP has become the first Australian company to have its vaccine mandate overturned, following a Fair Work Commission Full Bench decision.

hallandwilcox.com.au

Yes other factors, I think the most relevant here is ability to work from home. As he, and the media, have done in this COVID era.

A media company could argue that staff do spend a lot of time in the community and thus exposed. Therefore it is their duty to protect employees, such a mandate does that. Mandates are generally blanket across a business. Education/Health department, all staff must be vaccinated. Not just teachers/medical staff. Includes non core administrative roles.



Hopefully someone does test this in court in SA, as a decision made in a NSW is not binding in SA.





Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

No, their duty is to protect employees in the workplace, not when conducting their private lives. But yes, BHP got the process wrong, not sure how as my limited legal knowledge and few years in construction WHS, I had predicted this potential issue when Coles made the same call. But what the process requires is proper HIRAC. That results in differing controls for different work being undertaken. So once you identify covid as a workplace hazard, when you conduct the risk analysis, you'll arrive at different controls depending on the group or individual's particular risk. This is why the people in BHP head office don't have to wear safety boots, hi-vis and hard hats when working at their desk in the middle of Melbourne or wherever.

 

[AFC979810]

The winner at the trade table is already determined, it's us. Talent ID and and development is irrelevant to the trade winner. If you swap 1 for 44 you've lost the trade even if you select Sloane and they select Watts.

To a degree I think you are right, but with things like this there is always the gray area.

In this particular case I don't think that Talent ID and development is irrelevant at all. They made the trade to specifically pick up Stocker at pick 18. If he goes on to win a Brownlow they win the trade.

 

[Geoffa32]

No, their duty is to protect employees in the workplace, not when conducting their private lives. But yes, BHP got the process wrong, not sure how as my limited legal knowledge and few years in construction WHS, I had predicted this potential issue when Coles made the same call. But what the process requires is proper HIRAC. That results in differing controls for different work being undertaken. So once you identify covid as a workplace hazard, when you conduct the risk analysis, you'll arrive at different controls depending on the group or individual's particular risk. This is why the people in BHP head office don't have to wear safety boots, hi-vis and hard hats when working at their desk in the middle of Melbourne or wherever.

By community I mean reporters/production staff working outside the office. Interviewing members of the public, attending press conferences.

Not non work hours.



Hi Vis and Protective gear is task/environment specific. Which does not apply in an office.

However COVID virus is not limited to that.



This is why all Education/Health staff must be vaccinated. Not just those working in school/hospitals.

Yes schools/,hospitals greater risk than office building in Hindmarsh square or Waymourh St. But still a risk. No risk of being run over by a Mining Truck or lump of iron ore dropping on your toes in BHP head office.


Not sure I agree with such a blanket mandate though. But I got vaxed to protect me and my family, so not too fussed about mandates either way anyway.


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[GrommoT]

Anybody seen this before?



Sent from my MI PAD 4 using Tapatalk

Tried to post this yesterday but BF kept running into Oops! errors ... anyway, comic book version for those without FB and maybe not seen this before...

Spoiler: ....... dailyreminder1997

Spoiler: ....... more

Spoiler: ....... more

 

[MarcusP2]

No, their duty is to protect employees in the workplace, not when conducting their private lives. But yes, BHP got the process wrong, not sure how as my limited legal knowledge and few years in construction WHS, I had predicted this potential issue when Coles made the same call. But what the process requires is proper HIRAC. That results in differing controls for different work being undertaken. So once you identify covid as a workplace hazard, when you conduct the risk analysis, you'll arrive at different controls depending on the group or individual's particular risk. This is why the people in BHP head office don't have to wear safety boots, hi-vis and hard hats when working at their desk in the middle of Melbourne or wherever.

1. This case specifically applied to one coal mine in NSW.
2. The FWC also said that BHP would have a strong case that it was reasonable as a direction, if the correct consultation process was followed.

On Pixel 5 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1970crow]

By community I mean reporters/production staff working outside the office. Interviewing members of the public, attending press conferences.

Not non work hours.



Hi Vis and Protective gear is task/environment specific. Which does not apply in an office.

However COVID virus is not limited to that.



This is why all Education/Health staff must be vaccinated. Not just those working in school/hospitals.

Yes schools/,hospitals greater risk than office building in Hindmarsh square or Waymourh St. But still a risk. No risk of being run over by a Mining Truck or lump of iron ore dropping on your toes in BHP head office.


Not sure I agree with such a blanket mandate though. But I got vaxed to protect me and my family, so not too fussed about mandates either way anyway.


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

The control may end up being applied to every role, but that'll require a lot more effort than the CEO knocking out an email. Covid has seen the industry continue without actual interaction. Not even sure tredders was always in the studio prior to covid and I don't recall him interviewing anyone. If there's no risk based on particular method of operating then adding a vaccine requirement will not be lawful.

 

[1970crow]

1. This case specifically applied to one coal mine in NSW.
2. The FWC also said that BHP would have a strong case that it was reasonable as a direction, if the correct consultation process was followed.

On Pixel 5 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yes and also correct risk analysis. So the process will require both these things and the actual employees will have a large say in determining the outcome, not the senior managers sitting in their Sydney office. The WHS laws are built on the premise of conntinual worker interaction with decisions surrounding WHS controls. That the judge says it was reasonable is an opinion, not an outcome. What is reasonable will be what the consultation and risk assessment process conncludes.

 

[Geoffa32]

The control may end up being applied to every role, but that'll require a lot more effort than the CEO knocking out an email. Covid has seen the industry continue without actual interaction. Not even sure tredders was always in the studio prior to covid and I don't recall him interviewing anyone. If there's no risk based on particular method of operating then adding a vaccine requirement will not be lawful.

I think it would be a good case to test.

But doubt that will happen.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[1970crow]

I think it would be a good case to test.

But doubt that will happen.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I doubt it will be as it's too cut and dried. If Tredders has worked remotely in the past or can in the future then that is the highest level in the hierachy of controls. Vaccination doesn't come close to eliminating the risk. So when the question is asked how can we eliminate the risk, the answer is patently obvious and no further discussion would be entered into. There will be interesting cases going forward, but this won't be one of them. And you need to remember that the result of this, if he was to go ahead, which for future benefit he may not, it would only be a test for employees with a very similar risk analysis. People that have been solely working from home for ages would be a good example. Lets say they have no physical contact whatsoever during the ordinary fulfilment of their duties. No way would a blanked vaccination requirement be lawful as there is no risk requiring control. Now, adding that clause into future contracts would be a different argument, but under WHS law, there is no argument.

 

[Geoffa32]

I doubt it will be as it's too cut and dried. If Tredders has worked remotely in the past or can in the future then that is the highest level in the hierachy of controls. Vaccination doesn't come close to eliminating the risk. So when the question is asked how can we eliminate the risk, the answer is patently obvious and no further discussion would be entered into. There will be interesting cases going forward, but this won't be one of them. And you need to remember that the result of this, if he was to go ahead, which for future benefit he may not, it would only be a test for employees with a very similar risk analysis. People that have been solely working from home for ages would be a good example. Lets say they have no physical contact whatsoever during the ordinary fulfilment of their duties. No way would a blanked vaccination requirement be lawful as there is no risk requiring control. Now, adding that clause into future contracts would be a different argument, but under WHS law, there is no argument.

If he wants his jobs back......

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[baldandbroke]

I see bloody Celtic have stolen some marketing ideas from Power again ... Ken & Co. should sue.

 

[arrowman]

Buy an Adelaide Oval Roof Climb Gift Card for Christmas! The price is just right!

 

[Thetrader15]

I doubt it will be as it's too cut and dried. If Tredders has worked remotely in the past or can in the future then that is the highest level in the hierachy of controls. Vaccination doesn't come close to eliminating the risk. So when the question is asked how can we eliminate the risk, the answer is patently obvious and no further discussion would be entered into. There will be interesting cases going forward, but this won't be one of them. And you need to remember that the result of this, if he was to go ahead, which for future benefit he may not, it would only be a test for employees with a very similar risk analysis. People that have been solely working from home for ages would be a good example. Lets say they have no physical contact whatsoever during the ordinary fulfilment of their duties. No way would a blanked vaccination requirement be lawful as there is no risk requiring control. Now, adding that clause into future contracts would be a different argument, but under WHS law, there is no argument.

You're right with the idea of eliminating the hazard as the first control in managing the risk level, and WFH would be an appropriate measure.

The question would be if the management believes he can do his job to the best of his ability remotely forever.

I don't know enough about TV production to answer that, but there's certainly a difference between WFH for a while and doing it indefinitely, and the performance levels. It sounds like it shouldn't matter, but it does, I know from first hand experience. Generally speaking, you miss a lot of information when you aren't sitting next to your team members, issues are resolved slower, engagement drops, etc.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

Pilko said on 5aa that Tredders is getting the jab now, so we will never know.

 

[Apsaalooke]

Pilko said on 5aa that Tredders is getting the jab now, so we will never know.

He either researched it properly this time or needs the money

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

He either researched it properly this time or needs the money

I’m thinking option b

 

[subaru]

Tried to post this yesterday but BF kept running into Oops! errors ... anyway, comic book version for those without FB and maybe not seen this before...

Spoiler: ....... dailyreminder1997

Spoiler: ....... more

Spoiler: ....... more

Lol

 

[hey shorty]

I’m thinking option b

Probably both

 

[Bay62]

So looks like we’re getting the David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

Rule: at least one match suspension for hits to the head regardless of intention

To be known as the “Mad Dog” rule

https://www.afl.com.au/news/693315

 

[adelaidecrows]

So looks like we’re getting the David Mackay

14

David Mackay

Age

37

Ht

181cm

Wt

78kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.0

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

7.7

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

3.2

5star

MG

315.4

4star

D

16.5

4star

K

7.0

3star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.5

3star

T

2.0

3star

MG

265.5

4star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.8

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.2

3star

Rule: at least one match suspension for hits to the head regardless of intention

To be known as the “Mad Dog” rule

https://www.afl.com.au/news/693315

All that will happen is players will stop contesting the ball and look to tackle instead with which they almost do now. This rule wasn't needed. Sometimes the onus has to be on the dimwit getting hit in the head through being careless. That's exactly what happened in the Mackay situation. The St Kilda player simply ran into Mackay.

On SM-N981B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[radiojake]

What if the Mackay incident happens again but Mackay is the first to the ball and the other player has come in late but got himself cleaned up?

 

[GROTTO]

I really admired Chris Woakes for the length of time he survived batting in all places at Adelaide Oval in England's 2nd Innings.


Another Crows supporter I presume. Cheers.

 

[1970crow]

You're right with the idea of eliminating the hazard as the first control in managing the risk level, and WFH would be an appropriate measure.

The question would be if the management believes he can do his job to the best of his ability remotely forever.

I don't know enough about TV production to answer that, but there's certainly a difference between WFH for a while and doing it indefinitely, and the performance levels. It sounds like it shouldn't matter, but it does, I know from first hand experience. Generally speaking, you miss a lot of information when you aren't sitting next to your team members, issues are resolved slower, engagement drops, etc.

I was referring to his AA role where most of, if not all, the contributors call in or work from remote studios. TV production definitely a totally different kettle of fish.