Mandatory vaccination in the workplace: Here’s what employers and employees should know

As the world navigates the complexities of the COVID-19 pandemic, several countries, including France, Austria, Greece, the Netherlands, and the United States, have introduced mandatory vaccination policies in a race to achieve herd immunity. However, these interventions have faced resistance, with protests in some countries where individuals feel their freedom of choice is being challenged. As South Africa contemplates similar measures, companies are grappling with the best way to implement mandatory vaccination policies without causing disruptions. To shed light on this issue, experts Sandile July, Director of Labour and Employment at Werksmans, and Jacqui Reed, Employment Lawyer at Herbert Smith Freehills, recently shared insights on the considerations companies should keep in mind when implementing mandatory vaccination in the workplace. According to Reed, it's essential for employers to conduct a thorough risk assessment to determine if implementing a mandatory vaccination policy is justified in their specific workplace. Factors such as the demographics of employees, the level of risk for severe illness or hospitalization, and the adequacy of ventilation systems are crucial considerations. Additionally, consultation with health and safety committees, representatives, or trade unions is recommended to ensure a comprehensive approach. Reed highlighted that employees have the right to object to vaccination on constitutional or medical grounds. In such cases, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodation, ensuring the employee can continue working in a safe environment. If accommodation is not feasible, termination of employment may be considered as a last resort. July emphasized the importance of employers complying with regulations and offering reasonable accommodation where possible. He noted that employees who cannot be accommodated due to vaccination status may need to part ways with their employers, citing operational requirements as the basis for separation. He highlighted the distinction between the interests of individuals and the public, expressing the view that individual rights should not override public health interests. Reed discussed the significance of a declaratory order sought by some businesses to establish the constitutionality of mandatory vaccinations. The order aims to provide legal clarity on the implementation of mandatory vaccination policies in the workplace. Reed pointed out that while individual rights are important, certain rights can be limited in the interest of public health. She cited examples where mandatory vaccination policies have significantly increased vaccination rates, highlighting their effectiveness in achieving broader immunity. The discussion also touched on the need for scientific evidence and expert testimony to support the necessity of mandatory vaccinations. In conclusion, as companies navigate the complexities of implementing mandatory vaccination policies, the balancing act between individual rights and public health remains a critical concern. The insights shared by experts underscore the importance of thorough risk assessments, compliance with regulations, and a nuanced approach to addressing employee concerns. While the path forward may involve some challenges, the ultimate goal of protecting public health and promoting workplace safety should guide decision-making in this evolving landscape.