UPDATE: A few small business owners have expressed concern at being held accountable for injuries when they themselves were coerced into implementing mandates. Coming from a family of small business owners, and having owned a small business myself, I'm sympathetic. I would point out a couple of things:
1. This case is simply an application of the existing workplace law. By imposing workplace mandates under PHOs, the state governments put business owners in a precarious legal position - either refuse to implement the mandate and risk fines and imprisonment, or implement the mandate and risk massive injury payouts. This is clearly unfair, but so is enforcing a medical procedure on staff as a requirement for their employment.
2. Business owners were essentially put in the same position as doctors and nurses. In both cases, a handful resisted, but most complied, passing the buck on to employees and patients, who bore the consequences in their own bodies, or through loss of employment. Business owners and health practitioners alike had a window of a few months to organise a resistance lobby before the mandates came into effect. Very few took such action (applause to those who did). In truth, most complied willingly, without qualms. Hopefully, seeing the legal consequences of this decision play out will compel business owners to band together and not comply next time.
3. In this particular case the DCP had sent an email, which was then followed up by a supervisor texting the employee to pressure him into booking the booster appointment and sending proof. So it was a very clear case that the employment contributed to his injury, because there were multiple instances of coercive pressure applied by the employer.
4. Though many of us Australians had houses and businesses and relationships and EVERYTHING on the line, this case is suggestive that 'I was just following orders' is not the get-out-of-jail-free card some business owners thought it would be.
5. Ideally, enough cases of this type will deter the big players, like Qantas and Woolworths and Myer and so on from jumping to enforce mandates next time. Obviously no one wants to see little mom and pop businesses taken to the cleaners over this.
And in this case, the employer was DCP (Child “Protection”), a “not-small” govt agency which can certainly afford to steal more taxpayer dollars for this payout.
I do feel for the businesses, but the good news is that they will push back harder next time and hopefully refuse to comply unless the government accepts liability.
What bittersweet news. I'm so sorry these battles are even necessary, as people should never have been injured to begin with. Having said that, the work Peter (Julian, and others) is (are) doing in these spaces is so, so important. And thank you for keeping us up to speed, Rebekah.
Me too, it's like Peter said, unfortunately the law tends to work retrospectively and the mistakes have to be made and consequences handed out to effect change. At least the consequences are building up. Hopefully employers will be deterred from 'just following orders' next time.
And you wouldn’t believe the hours that people like Peter and Rado have put in. But on the bright side, the drip drip drip is yielding results, albeit slowly.
“For many injured Australians who have already lost a lot of money because of their injury, they just don’t have the resources to pay for lawyers to fight for compensation in the courts. Some are accepting paltry compensation offers that don’t even cover their costs because they don’t have the resources to fight it,” laments Dr Faletic.
The lawyers as usual make the money, and occasionally get a win, but they are rarely out of pocket themselves!
People don't have the money to fight to get compensation, are there no legal firms willing to take on such a big legal case pro-bono (if that is the term)- or do they all think it is a waste of time given that so many cases have been lost?
I fortunately have not had the vaxx but I feel for those who are in such dire circumstances that they must accept meagre payments
There are a bunch who have given their blood sweat and tears for free - Peter Fam, Julian Gillespie, Katie Ashby-Koppens, Tony Nikolic and no doubt many more who quietly go about helping people with no acknowledgement. But yes I take your point, all of this malarky benefits the lawyers. Every new victim is billable hours.
This is great to know, even though at this time I don't need any help in this area as I have not had the vaxx and keep away from those that have had it.
However someone I know would like to find a doctor that can help them get spike protein out of their system, which they seem to have contracted by a prolonged massage with a physiotherapist.
Are you aware of anyone in Australia who can help with medical procedures to clean this junk out of our bodies?
I just read the transcript of the case (link on Dr Bryam Bridles substack). A clearly reasoned decision. ..I think this is the first time I have seen an analysis that says the Emergency Powers Act does not override existing legislation, a fact everyone seems to have accepted without a moments questioning. This case surely must have far reaching consequences even tho it was only a Tribunal decision dealing with workers compensation. While I do feel for small business owners, surely the vaccine injured deserve some redress after all they have suffered. Not to mention the social disruption this Act has inflicted.
I agree. Ultimately I think this will be a good decision for both employers and employees. The benefit to employees is obvious, but for employers it gives them backing to resist implementing such mandates under future emergency provisions.
Watching this case for the employer's/workers compensation insurer's appeal.
Things will get spicier if this decision stands and the workers compensation insurer then seeks recovery / proportionate liability from the south Australian state government and/or other parties.
UPDATE: A few small business owners have expressed concern at being held accountable for injuries when they themselves were coerced into implementing mandates. Coming from a family of small business owners, and having owned a small business myself, I'm sympathetic. I would point out a couple of things:
1. This case is simply an application of the existing workplace law. By imposing workplace mandates under PHOs, the state governments put business owners in a precarious legal position - either refuse to implement the mandate and risk fines and imprisonment, or implement the mandate and risk massive injury payouts. This is clearly unfair, but so is enforcing a medical procedure on staff as a requirement for their employment.
2. Business owners were essentially put in the same position as doctors and nurses. In both cases, a handful resisted, but most complied, passing the buck on to employees and patients, who bore the consequences in their own bodies, or through loss of employment. Business owners and health practitioners alike had a window of a few months to organise a resistance lobby before the mandates came into effect. Very few took such action (applause to those who did). In truth, most complied willingly, without qualms. Hopefully, seeing the legal consequences of this decision play out will compel business owners to band together and not comply next time.
3. In this particular case the DCP had sent an email, which was then followed up by a supervisor texting the employee to pressure him into booking the booster appointment and sending proof. So it was a very clear case that the employment contributed to his injury, because there were multiple instances of coercive pressure applied by the employer.
4. Though many of us Australians had houses and businesses and relationships and EVERYTHING on the line, this case is suggestive that 'I was just following orders' is not the get-out-of-jail-free card some business owners thought it would be.
5. Ideally, enough cases of this type will deter the big players, like Qantas and Woolworths and Myer and so on from jumping to enforce mandates next time. Obviously no one wants to see little mom and pop businesses taken to the cleaners over this.
And in this case, the employer was DCP (Child “Protection”), a “not-small” govt agency which can certainly afford to steal more taxpayer dollars for this payout.
I do feel for the businesses, but the good news is that they will push back harder next time and hopefully refuse to comply unless the government accepts liability.
Me too
What bittersweet news. I'm so sorry these battles are even necessary, as people should never have been injured to begin with. Having said that, the work Peter (Julian, and others) is (are) doing in these spaces is so, so important. And thank you for keeping us up to speed, Rebekah.
Me too, it's like Peter said, unfortunately the law tends to work retrospectively and the mistakes have to be made and consequences handed out to effect change. At least the consequences are building up. Hopefully employers will be deterred from 'just following orders' next time.
Yes, this is sadly very true. I agree, and I certainly share your hopes for the inevitable "next time".
Thanks for your hard work & determination, Rebekah. It's sad that you have had to do it.
And you wouldn’t believe the hours that people like Peter and Rado have put in. But on the bright side, the drip drip drip is yielding results, albeit slowly.
Thanks for posting this one. That's going into my archive.
“For many injured Australians who have already lost a lot of money because of their injury, they just don’t have the resources to pay for lawyers to fight for compensation in the courts. Some are accepting paltry compensation offers that don’t even cover their costs because they don’t have the resources to fight it,” laments Dr Faletic.
The lawyers as usual make the money, and occasionally get a win, but they are rarely out of pocket themselves!
People don't have the money to fight to get compensation, are there no legal firms willing to take on such a big legal case pro-bono (if that is the term)- or do they all think it is a waste of time given that so many cases have been lost?
I fortunately have not had the vaxx but I feel for those who are in such dire circumstances that they must accept meagre payments
There are a bunch who have given their blood sweat and tears for free - Peter Fam, Julian Gillespie, Katie Ashby-Koppens, Tony Nikolic and no doubt many more who quietly go about helping people with no acknowledgement. But yes I take your point, all of this malarky benefits the lawyers. Every new victim is billable hours.
Thanks Rebekah
This is great to know, even though at this time I don't need any help in this area as I have not had the vaxx and keep away from those that have had it.
However someone I know would like to find a doctor that can help them get spike protein out of their system, which they seem to have contracted by a prolonged massage with a physiotherapist.
Are you aware of anyone in Australia who can help with medical procedures to clean this junk out of our bodies?
I just read the transcript of the case (link on Dr Bryam Bridles substack). A clearly reasoned decision. ..I think this is the first time I have seen an analysis that says the Emergency Powers Act does not override existing legislation, a fact everyone seems to have accepted without a moments questioning. This case surely must have far reaching consequences even tho it was only a Tribunal decision dealing with workers compensation. While I do feel for small business owners, surely the vaccine injured deserve some redress after all they have suffered. Not to mention the social disruption this Act has inflicted.
I agree. Ultimately I think this will be a good decision for both employers and employees. The benefit to employees is obvious, but for employers it gives them backing to resist implementing such mandates under future emergency provisions.
Watching this case for the employer's/workers compensation insurer's appeal.
Things will get spicier if this decision stands and the workers compensation insurer then seeks recovery / proportionate liability from the south Australian state government and/or other parties.
Something is seriously wrong.
The ABC only releases what it is told/ allowed to release.
Any ideas anyone?
Mine are rather cynical so I will keep them to myself.
ABC?
And just saw this-
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-31/sa-government-employee-wins-compensation-after-covid-vaccine/103408524
Daily Mail covered it today as well.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13023211/Covid-jab-legal-victory-Daniel-Shepherd.html
ABC Radio Adelaide 5an.
It was the top news stories this morning.