Opinion: Air New Zealand became the first company on the company’s vaccine mandate last week. As he proposed a plan to make the Cove 19 Jab mandatory for approximately 4,000 employees. In making a decision, the airline begins a difficult conversation for employers across the country.
AirNZ plans to make the covid vaccine mandatory for half of its workforce, with cargo handlers and other customer-facing staff bringing the latest under the company’s policy.
Cabin crew, pilots, engineering and maintenance staff and supply chain workers were already covered under the official Public Health Order issued in July. Under the order, businesses at higher risk of expanding into the environment may determine that certain tasks are performed only by vaccinated people.
The decision to extend the flag carrier’s vaccine requirements comes after 18 months on the frontline of the epidemic, which carries the greatest risk of any Kiwi company, transporting passengers, workers and goods across the border.
* Can the ‘no time, no job’ law be legal?
* Cove 19 New Zealand: Employees cannot fire employees for refusing to be vaccinated, but may refuse to employ them.
* Can your boss call shots at the Cove 19 vaccination?
Although extraordinary measures have been taken to address the public health crisis, employers will inevitably face disagreements.
The cases have already gone to the Employment Court. One The Anti-Wax Frontline Border Worker recently took New Zealand Customs to the Employment Relations Authority after losing his job. When customs decided that their role needed to be filled by the vaccinated person. On September 1, the IRA rejected the claim of unfair dismissal.
during this, Port workers in Turanga have also challenged their vaccine mandate.. A group of activists said the port had stripped them of their “freedom of choice” and filed a lawsuit challenging vaccination laws.
I suspect that in the midst of a deadly epidemic, there will be little sympathy for the border workers fighting the vaccine mandate on ideological grounds. But the issues highlight the challenges employers face as vaccine rollouts increase, border restrictions loosen, the number of cases increases and businesses try to adapt.
Businesses in New Zealand have never before dealt with an epidemic and the legal complications that follow. He will face some of the same employment law issues facing his international colleagues.
Corporates have taken different approaches in different jurisdictions. In the United States, which has weak legal protections for workers, companies, including Facebook, have tightened vaccine orders. Meanwhile, the US news agency CNN fired three people for working without work.
In the UK, a network of trade contractors, Pamelaco Plumbers, has taken a hard line. It intends to implement a “no time, no job” policy for its 4,000 workers and renew contracts to strengthen its hand. The company’s founder says he will “boot out” workers who do not receive the vaccine by January.
In Australia, Qantas has provided guidance with a strict vaccine mandate for Qantas and Jetstar employees.
Alan Joyce, chief executive of Qantas, said last month, “If other employees decide they are not taking the job, they are deciding that aviation is not an area for them.”
Qantas has the support of the Australian government. Australian ministers say businesses can make vaccination mandatory if it is appropriate for them to do so.
In New Zealand, companies that do not fall under the government’s public health order will not be able to enforce the vaccine order on existing employees. However, Employment Relations Minister Michael Wood has indicated that businesses may require new employees to be vaccinated, although this has not been tested in court.
Like every aspect of the Quaid 19 response, the legal framework is evolving rapidly over time. If the virus gets out of control, the government’s public health order could be extended, or a new one could be created, to bring more people under vaccine options.
Of course, there will be friction between employers and workers during the introduction of the vaccine.
Businesses will want to protect the health of their employees and reduce the number of disruptions and sick days in their workforce. But they will also face discriminatory challenges and additional headaches, such as estimating medical exemptions and securing health data.
Matthew McGoldrick, a partner at SBM Legal, an employment law expert, says companies are taking the strongest line possible under the current guidance.
“At this stage, companies are trying to encourage workers to be vaccinated but are not necessarily vaccinating them. Given the nature of the public health order and the general legal position, this is probably the right point.” Look
Although companies cannot force workers to get vaccinated, the crisis is likely to affect recruitment decisions, as it is abroad. This can lead to discriminatory claims and complications for businesses as people examine legal boundaries.
Entrepreneurs will need to carefully consider their approach to recruitment and their recruitment policies. Meanwhile, job seekers may have to get in the habit of asking questions about their vaccine status and eligibility.
Lack of legal certainty around vaccines is a source of pain for many businesses. The employment scenario is going to be much more complicated. The human rights department and lawyers have been busy for years.