Qantas’ unlawful vaccine mandate next in the Fair Work Commission’s firing line

By Daniel Y. Teng Epoch times

The major decision last week by Australia’s workplace tribunal to strike down a vaccine mandate by mining giant, BHP, has opened the door for other unions to consider challenging similar orders in their sectors.

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce might have to stop his ‘phony consultation with employees’ after BHP decision

The Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineer’s Association (ALAEA) said it would consider challenging vaccine mandates handed down by national carrier Qantas.

“The BHP coal decision was about consultation, not vaccine mandates. A policy decision cannot be made prior to genuine consultation. Qantas has been fined before for telling us a policy decision at the first consultation meeting,” Steve Purvinas, federal secretary of the ALAEA, told The Epoch Times in a statement.

“In the case of mandatory vaccination, it is worse. We first heard about the decision on live television.”

On Dec. 3, the full bench of the Fair Work Commission (FWC) ruled that BHP’s vaccine mandate on workers at the Mt Arthur thermal coal mine in the Hunter Valley, New South Wales, was unlawful and unreasonable.

The decision was slated to have ramifications across the country, specifically for vaccine mandates handed down by private businesses and not under government-mandated health orders.

The FWC members found that BHP did not hold proper consultations with its employees before implementing its mandate, a requirement under the union’s enterprise agreement.

BHP’s health and safety officials also admitted the word “consultation” was not used in its email on the mandate, nor was the word “mandatory” present in the company’s formal announcement.

Giuseppe Carabetta, a senior lecturer at the Sydney University Business School, said the decision did not spell “defeat for employers mandating COVID-19 vaccination.”

“Indeed, the ruling isn’t really about the overall validity of Mt Arthur’s vaccine mandate. Its focus is instead management’s failure to properly consult with its employees under work health and safety laws,” he wrote in The Conversation on Dec. 7.

Carabetta said vaccine mandates needed to be reasonable depending on the “nature of the work, established practices, industrial instruments; and consultation requirements.”

Purvinas meanwhile, conceded that the BHP decision would not apply to most airport workers, who fall under government mandates, he noted, however, that “this is not the case at all airports.”

“If a member of ours was not covered by a state mandate, we would look to defend their job based on the perfunctory nature of Qantas’ phony consultation,” he said.

The ALAEA does accept that vaccination does contribute to workplace health and safety, but objects to workers losing their positions if they are unvaccinated.

“Unvaccinated employees should be able to take leave until they are vaccinated or the threat is otherwise removed through herd immunity.”

About Editor, cairnsnews

One of the few patriots left who understands the system and how it has been totally subverted under every citizen's nose. If we can help to turn it around we will, otherwise our children will have nothing. Our investigations show there is no 'government' of the people for the people of Australia. The removal of the Crown from Australian Parliaments, followed by the incorporation of Parliaments aided by the Australia Act 1987 has left us with corporate government with policies not laws, that apply only to members of political parties and the public service. There is no law, other than the Common Law. This fact will be borne out in the near future as numerous legal challenges in place now, come to a head soon.

Posted on December 10, 2021, in Airline disaster, Qantas and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.

  1. Correct! I would also recommend hazmat suits for all employees in order to protect them from “vaxxine” shedding and transmission by those who are vaccinated! 😉


  2. If you compare vaccination compulsory like hard hats or safety glasses in order to perform your duties at work and are paid to do so then you should be paid 24/7 for having vaccination because unlike safety glasses and hard hats where you can remove them at end of working shift a vaccination is permanent


  3. “Did we quote those television morons? Ed”

    Of course you didn’t, Ed! Quite the opposite! lol I wouldn’t patronise your site if you did. I was referring to those in the general public who might be tempted to exercise their gullibility and stupidity.


  4. Did we quote those television morons? Ed


  5. It’s too dangerous for pilots to be vaccinated against covid19 in the possibility that they should have a stroke, heart attack or die whilst in the air. It has happened itself USA and Great Britain this year. Leave pilots alone or vaccinated the to your own peril.


  6. “The ALAEA does accept that vaccination does contribute to workplace health and safety”

    On what basis does the ALAEA accept that? Where did it find evidence that it stops transmission? Let us all have a look at that evidence! But please refrain from quoting TV puppets such as Lisa Wilkinson or Karl Stefanovic as authorities on the matter.

    Last information I saw was that there is no significant transmissability difference between the vaxxinated and the unvaxxinated and that viral load in the vaxxinated was considerably greater.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: