Staff at Plumbing firm Pimlico have been told that they will all have their contracts rewritten in a move to make all workers be vaccinated against Coronavirus. The company’s chairman has said workers who do not comply with the policy may not be kept on, and he is apparently so determined that all staff are vaccinated that he is prepared to pay for private immunisations for people at the firm, when they become available.

Contracts for new workers will include the requirement to be immunised and those of existing workers will be rewritten. Chairman Charlie Mullins said employees approved of the policy. He said:

"It's a no-brainer. I've talked to people who have said: 'I will queue up all night to get the vaccine.' I think it will be the norm in five or six months. To go into a bar or cinema, or go on a plane, you have to have a vaccine."

Mullins said he had set aside £800,000 to pay for private vaccinations, but estimated costs to be more in the region of £100,000.

"Whatever it costs, I will pay," he said. "I would pay £1m tomorrow to safeguard our staff.”

However, employment lawyers say this vaccination policy could raise a number of legal concerns. Pam Loch, Solicitor and Managing Director of Loch Employment Law, part of the Loch Associates Group, says that, while there is no doubt that Pimlico Plumbers’ plan to change their employees’ contracts to ensure that all staff must have a COVID-19 vaccination is controversial, it is also potentially opening up a can of worms. She says:

“An employer cannot lawfully force individuals to be vaccinated. The Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 states that members of the public should not be compelled to undergo any mandatory medical treatment, which includes vaccinations. In certain sectors where inoculations are required to do the job, for example in shipping or travelling overseas, then it could be a lawful requirement to have it as a contractual requirement.

“However, it is a new vaccine and, with the fake news stories circulating, some staff may be unwilling to have the vaccine for a variety of reasons. Staff who refuse to have the vaccination and are dismissed, are likely to have a good basis for bringing successful claims for unfair dismissal and potentially direct and indirect discrimination too - if they have more than two years’ service. If they have less than two years’ service, they could bring discrimination claims.”

Loch advises that it is worth noting that unlawful discrimination covers a wider group than just employees under the Equality Act 2010. It can mean that contractors, freelancers and workers could bring discrimination claims if a business tries to force them to be vaccinated and they fall into one of the protected groups.

Who could bring a discrimination claim? There are nine protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and individuals who are covered by one of those could bring claims. The protected characteristics are sex, age, disability, race, religion or belief, pregnancy and maternity, gender orientation and marriage and civil partnership.

Loch continues:

“Some individuals may not be able to have the vaccine because they are pregnant or breastfeeding. They could bring claims based on their sex and/or pregnancy and maternity if it is a requirement that they must have the vaccine. Likewise, those who have a suppressed immune system could bring claims for discrimination on the basis that they have a disability. An employer should also keep in mind that with disabilities there is an additional requirement to consider and make reasonable adjustments if someone is unable to have the vaccine.”

Loch says that employers also need to be aware that staff who may have a religious or philosophical belief could bring claims if they try to compel them to have the vaccine or make it a requirement, which it is not lawful. She says:

“Some staff may have made decisions not to be vaccinated due to fake news. For example, ethical vegans may be concerned that some vaccines contain animal products. The Department of Health has tried to make it clear that the Astra Zeneca and Pfizer vaccines do not contain animal products. However, this may not be enough to convince them. In addition, it was recently established that ethical vegans could be regarded as having a belief and therefore could be in a position to bring discrimination claims.

“An employer should take specialist advice before they try to compel staff to have the vaccine and be very cautious about dismissing an employee or subjecting them to less favourable treatment if they refuse to have it. Employers can encourage staff to have vaccines and provide information to enable them to make informed decisions. If an employee is reluctant to have a vaccine they should explain the reasons why to their employer and try to reach a compromise.”