Update
Beyond COVID-19: Employment and labor
Employers have obligations for the health and safety of their employees and to protect their personal data.
Australia | Publication | May 2020
The Federal Government launched the COVIDSafe app as part of their work to slow the spread of COVID-19, indicating the app will help state and territory health officials to quickly contact people who may have been exposed to COVID-19. The message widely spread by the Government is that the more people download the COVIDSafe app, the easier it will be to stop the spread of COVID-19.1
On 15 May 2020, the Privacy Amendment (Public Health Contact Information) Act 2020 (Act) received Royal Assent, regulating the operation of the COVIDSafe app.2
The question arises as to whether employers, as a measure to manage workplace health and safety risks, can direct their employees to download the app and impose disciplinary action on those who refuse to do so.
The short answer to that question is no. Subsection 94H(1) of the Act prohibits coercing individuals to download or use the COVIDSafe app, expressly indicating that a person must not require that another person to:
In addition to the above, subsection 64H(2) of the Act states that a person commits an offence if the person: (i) refuses to enter into, or continue, a contract or arrangement with another person (including a contract of employment); or (ii) takes adverse action, within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act), against another person; or (iii) refuses to allow another person to enter premises which are otherwise accessible to the public, or that the person has otherwise the right to enter; or (iv) refuses to allow another person to participate in an activity; or (iv) refuses to receive goods or services from another person, or insists on providing less monetary consideration for the goods or service; or (v) refuses to provide goods or services to another person, or insists on receiving more monetary consideration for the goods or services, on the ground that, or on grounds that include the ground that, the other person:
Therefore, employers cannot direct employees to download the COVIDSafe app, even if their work needs to be performed at the employer’s premises, and requires potential contact with other employees or clients.
To avoid doubt, subsection 94H(3) of the Act indicates that:
Based on this, an employer must not take adverse action against employees (or prospect employees) for failing to download the COVIDSafe app.3
The note in subsection 94H(1) of the Act indicates that breaching the Act carries imprisonment for five years or 300 penalty units, or both.
Despite prohibiting coercing individuals to download the COVIDSafe app, the Act does not prohibit employers from encouraging the use of the COVIDSafe app in their workplaces. In doing so, employers must make clear that downloading the COVIDSafe app is voluntary, and that a refusal to do so will not result in adverse action taken against anyone.
The COVID-19 situation in Australia is continuously evolving. This update is correct as at 18 May 2020. We encourage you to contact us to keep up to speed with the latest developments.
See information on the COVIDSafe app published by the Department of Health here.
The Privacy Amendment (Public Health Contact Information) Act 2020 (Act) received Royal Assent on 15 May 2020. The text of the bill as passed by both houses of the Commonwealth Parliament can be accessed here.
Section 342 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) indicates that adverse action against an employee includes dismissing an employee, injuring the employee in his/her employment, altering the employee’s position to the employee’s prejudice or discriminating between the employee and the other employees of the employer. Also, adverse action against a prospective employee includes refusing to employ a prospective employee, or discriminating against the prospective employee in the terms or conditions on which the prospective employer offers to employ the prospective employee.
Publication
On 24 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that the European Commission’s (the EC) 2009 decision, which imposed a (then record) €1.06 billion fine on Intel, was flawed as far as it found that loyalty rebates granted by Intel had anti-competitive effects.
Publication
The Dutch tax classification system for non-Dutch entities will undergo significant changes as of 1 January 2025.
Publication
In King Crude Carriers SA & Ors v Ridgebury November LLC & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 719 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant sellers (the Sellers) were entitled to claim the deposits promised under sale contracts as a debt despite the defendant buyers’ (the Buyers) breach of contract, which had resulted in the non-fulfilment of a condition precedent to the payment of the deposits.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023