New Code of Practice: Managing Exposure to Covid in the Workplace to be Challenged in the High Court

According to Gerhard Papenfus, Chief Executive of the National Employers' Association of South Africa (NEASA), "The mandating of the vaccines-narrative, driven by the (South African) Government as a response to Covid-19, is not the result of poor judgement or scientific error. The policy is the result of detailed planning by global actors and was, consequently, right from the outset, presented as the only viable response to the manufactured Covid-19 predicament, and forms an integral part of the ‘Great Reset’ of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Agenda 2030".

Papenfus goes on to say, "Employers need to understand the context in which the global vaccine drive is playing out and the risk involved in making ‘life-and-death’ decisions in this regard. Simply following the popular narrative, succumbing to pressure, in whatever form, or the defence that you were unaware of the dangers, will not protect the employer when the chips are down, especially when you have forced an employee to take the injection or risk losing his/her job".

There are two diametrically opposing schools of thought regarding the Government’s vaccine policy; those who support the Government’s Covid vaccination policies and vaccination rollout programmes, and those who do not.

According to Papenfus, those in favour of mandatory Covid-19 vaccination policies, base their position on Government’s narrative that:

• based on the ‘science’, vaccines are the panacea for the Covid-19 ‘predicament’;

• vaccines are effective and safe;

• no further discussion on the topic of vaccinations is required; and

• discussion/debate around the issue of vaccinations is suppressed, regardless of the information to the contrary which fundamentally challenges this narrative.

Again, according to Papenfus, those who are opposed to the Covid-19 vaccines, do so on the following grounds:

• vaccines do not prevent viral transmission;

• being vaccinated does not prevent infection;

• that, statistically, vaccinations do not reduce all-cause hospitalisation or all-cause mortality;

• short-term safety data to date is extremely concerning;

• growing evidence that Covid-19 vaccines have negative effects on the immune system;

• the long-term safety profile and long-term adverse effects, especially from repeated doses and ‘boosters’, are as yet unknown, and are a cause for concern; and

• natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is superior to the immunity provided by the administering of vaccines.

So strongly does Papenfus feel about the matter that the National Employers’ Association of South Africa has turned to the (Pretoria) High Court in an attempt to challenge Government’s recently implemented ‘Code of Practice for Managing Exposure to COVID in the Workplace’.

The New Code of Practice became effective on the 15 April 2022, coinciding with the cessation of the State of Disaster in SA on the same day, and is aimed at guiding employers and employees in managing exposure to COVID at the workplace.

NEASA’s position is that the New Code of Practice for Managing Exposure to COVID in the Workplace goes beyond providing “guidance” and imposes certain obligations on employers who may be sanctioned if they choose not to comply with the guidelines.

In particular, the employer body takes issue with certain sections relating to the incorporation of regulations contained in the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Code provides that insofar as any contravention thereof constitutes a contravention of the Act or the regulations, it also constitutes an offence and can attract a penalty.

NEASA believes the Code infringes on and restricts various constitutional rights, including the rights to dignity, privacy, bodily integrity, the freedom of trade and occupation, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, belief and opinion of the individual.

"In making profound decisions and giving direction in this regard, including the moral implications of forcing employees into certain actions against their will, employers will have to consider the long-term consequences of their decisions. Doing the right thing will require common sense, foresight, emotional intelligence and courage" concluded Papenfus.

We await the High Court’s decision in this regard with eager anticipation.

Get in Touch

Visit www.dynamixhrsolutions.com to view my other Human Resources, Labour Relations and Leadership related articles, and to see how Dynamix HR Solutions can assist you, your business, or your company with your people management issues.

Dynamix HR Solutions offers a wide and diverse range of Human Resources and Labour Relations services and solutions tailored to meet your business's specific requirements as well as your budget.