Legal experts respond to Qantas’ ‘cut-throat jab or job’ approach

Employment lawyers in the UK have responded to the news that Australian airline Qantas has instructed all of its employees to be vaccinated against Covid-19.

Frontline employees including pilots, cabin crew and airport staff will all be subject to the new mandate, and will have until 15 November 2021 to receive both doses of the vaccine, while all remaining staff will have until 31 March, 2022.

In a release shared by the airline, it stated that there will be exemptions for those who are unable for medical reasons to be vaccinated.

Alan Joyce, CEO of Qantas Group, said that having a fully vaccinated workforce would “safeguard our people against the virus but also protect our customers and the communities we fly to”.

Explaining the reasoning behind the mandate, Joyce added: “One crew member can fly into multiple cities and come into contact with thousands of people in a single day. Making sure they are vaccinated given the potential of this virus to spread is so important and I think it’s the kind of safety leadership people would expect from us.”

While this mandate has taken place in Australia, where the state of New South Wales recently reported its highest daily rise in coronavirus cases, the instruction to force staff to get the vaccine holds harsh lessons for UK employees who wish to do the same.

‘Cut-throat’ approach

Speaking to Reward Strategy, Rhona Darbyshire, partner and head of employment at law firm Cripps Pemberton Greenish, branded the approach as “cut-throat”, pointing out that such a blanket policy could lead to claims of discrimination in UK organisations.

“Qantas’ cut-throat “jab or job” approach has been echoed by some UK employers such as Pimlico, however, adopting a blanket policy is not as simple as it may seem,” she explained.

“Operating a jab or job policy can expose employers to discrimination claims brought by employees who refuse on the basis of their disability, religion or philosophical belief.”

Constructive conversations

Stephen Moore, partner and head of the employment team at law firm Ashfords, echoed Darbyshire’s concerns of a rise in discrimination cases. He added that if an employee was dismissed over their choice to get vaccinated, employers would need to establish if a dismissal was a reasonable response.

He said: “Depending on the work being carried out in the role and the level of exposure to others, the employer’s decision to dismiss may be found to be reasonable, subject to the facts of the case.”

With this in mind, Moore shared that employers should instead “attempt to have constructive conversations” with employees when it comes to concerns over the vaccine, to avoid any unnecessary claims of discrimination and dismissals in the workplace.

Changes to legislation

Under new legislation, from November staff working in care homes will have to have the vaccine and Kathryn Evans, partner and head of employment at Trethowans, told Reward Strategy that this could also be the case in the near future for employees in the tourism sector.

She added that demanding workers are vaccinated is “arguably a breach of human rights”, meaning employees do have some rights not to go through a medical procedure.

However, she explained: “If the government enacts legislation which makes a Covid-19 vaccination a requirement of specific roles, such as those in the tourism sector, then it would follow that an unvaccinated person is not eligible for those roles.

“So, legally, unvaccinated persons could not be offered a job within tourism and those who are already employed in the sector could become incapable of performing their role because they don’t have the vaccination.”

For the latest on employment law, check out the latest issue of Reward Strategy here.