Winners and losers in vaxxed economy
What becomes of the less than 10 per cent who are unvaccinated?
An old friend used to say, ‘the lawyers always win’, and opening up with different regulations for the vaccinated and unvaccinated has all the hallmarks of a lawyers’ picnic.
Like the rest of the country, Greater Shepparton is on a path to 90 per cent vaccination of the eligible population.
The first-dose numbers are encouraging, but unlike other vaccines for diseases like polio or measles, the COVID-19 vaccine isn’t about effectively eliminating the virus.
The US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) says COVID19 vaccines effectively protect you from COVID-19, especially severe illness and death.
COVID-19 vaccines also reduce the risk of people spreading the virus that causes COVID-19.
“If you are fully vaccinated, you can resume activities that you did before the pandemic,” the CDC states.
The World Health Organization has a similar view, but even the vaccinated will have to keep up simple measures like sanitising, social distancing and even mask-wearing to drive down the spread.
Australia typically has vaccination rates above 90 per cent.
The COVID-19 vaccine looks to be heading above that mark too. Still, a segment of the population remains unvaccinated for medical reasons, or by choice.
Two teachers have already launched legal action over the Victorian Government mandating vaccines for essential workers, and others are likely to follow.
The real picnic starts when we open up.
How workplaces, businesses, events and even social gatherings treat the unvaccinated is going to be complicated.
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has tried to survey the landscape, but it will be complex with different jurisdictions in each state and territory. States and territories will also introduce regulations using public health powers, which will undoubtedly be tested in the courts.
Suppose there is no specific law requiring COVID19 vaccination.
In that case, the AHRC says businesses and service providers should be cautious about imposing a blanket rule requiring vaccination as a condition of entry at facilities, or for the delivery or provision of goods or services.
The Sex Discrimination Act 1984, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, and the Age Discrimination Act 2004 make it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of pregnancy, disability and age in many areas of public life.
A strict rule or condition that requires COVID-19 vaccination as a condition may engage the ‘indirect discrimination’ provisions.
Section 48 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 provides that it is not unlawful for a person to discriminate against another person based on disability — either directly or indirectly — if the person’s disability is an infectious disease and the discrimination is reasonably necessary to protect public health.
As always, though, there’s a catch, and that is the test of ‘‘reasonableness’’.
Our courts already have a substantial backlog due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it will get even busier.