That's a very good point, but separate to the issues that RDA is highlighting with this survey, which is that continued exclusion of unjabbed healthcare workers from the publicly-funded healthcare system is not in the interests of Australians.
The job issues are complex. What is needed more than anything is a reboot of the mind regarding individual power in a Law sense as opposed to Legal which is something quite other.
Getting a grounding in the most basic comprehension of Contract and all that that involves is a beginning point. Those making claims must support those claims with evidence and if they do not the claim fails so we can demand (actually politely request is better) 'they' provide the evidence of any claims made or make clear that 'their' claim fails.
So the claim that a health order demanded a health intervention to continue with an employment contract can be, must be challenged as to the Lawful foundation that makes it Lawful. Without Lawful foundation it is not Law and the Contract stands as it was written without any amendment permitted.
Read the contract you signed for employment very thoroughly is the first point. A contract can normally only be amended or altered by MUTUAL agreement of the parties bound by that Contract .
Very true, but of no use when we're no longer under the rule of law. So many court cases in this country have been lost because judicial officers have admitted that govt broke the law/defied the constitution, but ruled in their favour anyway because 'it was an emergency'.
WRONG QUESTION. Should be "would you accept or Should you accept treatment care from a Vaxxed individual?" The Vaxxed are likely mnore dangerous to your health than any, repeat ANY un-vaxxed.
There should be an option about back pay...
That's a very good point, but separate to the issues that RDA is highlighting with this survey, which is that continued exclusion of unjabbed healthcare workers from the publicly-funded healthcare system is not in the interests of Australians.
There should be a question about back pay...
The job issues are complex. What is needed more than anything is a reboot of the mind regarding individual power in a Law sense as opposed to Legal which is something quite other.
Getting a grounding in the most basic comprehension of Contract and all that that involves is a beginning point. Those making claims must support those claims with evidence and if they do not the claim fails so we can demand (actually politely request is better) 'they' provide the evidence of any claims made or make clear that 'their' claim fails.
So the claim that a health order demanded a health intervention to continue with an employment contract can be, must be challenged as to the Lawful foundation that makes it Lawful. Without Lawful foundation it is not Law and the Contract stands as it was written without any amendment permitted.
Read the contract you signed for employment very thoroughly is the first point. A contract can normally only be amended or altered by MUTUAL agreement of the parties bound by that Contract .
Very true, but of no use when we're no longer under the rule of law. So many court cases in this country have been lost because judicial officers have admitted that govt broke the law/defied the constitution, but ruled in their favour anyway because 'it was an emergency'.
WRONG QUESTION. Should be "would you accept or Should you accept treatment care from a Vaxxed individual?" The Vaxxed are likely mnore dangerous to your health than any, repeat ANY un-vaxxed.
Do the homework on the reality.
RDA is working hard to help get unjabbed healthcare workers' jobs back. These issues need to be approached separately.