Forward from: National Education United
The D.O.E lawyers agreed, through 'objection', that Woody was "not qualified" to describe what things such as 'relevant work' were.
Dodds countered with the s.78 of the Evidence Act 1995 (no.2).
78 Exception: lay opinions
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion
expressed by a person if:
(a) the opinion is based on what the person saw, heard or
otherwise perceived about a matter or event; and
(b) evidence of the opinion is necessary to obtain an adequate
account or understanding of the person’s perception of the
matter or event
76 The opinion rule
(1) Evidence of an opinion is not admissible to prove the existence of a
fact about the existence of which the opinion was expressed.
Yet, it appears that new and other teachers (non-doctors) and educators were expected to interpret everything,
within a few short weeks, and make a life-changing decision based upon it!
"I can't put myself in that position", said Dr. Woody,
it, "in a place I haven't been faced with".
Either way Woody or pokey squirmed, Dodds was ready for them (as was just logic)
as the "determination to terminate or charge with misconduct, was D.O.E" driven!
This included people on leave.
The Gorgon's 'determinations' evidence this.
So too, does the special
'MANAGEMENT OF CONDUCT RELATED TO NON-COMPLIANCE WITH COVID-19
VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS GUIDELINES' (M.O.C.R.T.N-C.W.C19.V.R.G)
ironically under headings such as '4.4 Procedural Fairness' (p. 9).
The M.O.C.R.T.N-C.W.C19.V.R.G (even the acronym is laborious)
also addresses the lack of 'delineation between all and individual staff', as asserted (by Dodds) in
'4.7 Deciding each matter on its merits and taking appropriate action' (p.10):
"Disciplinary and remedial processes must be applied consistently, each matter must be treated on its
individual merits and the result in action relevant to the individual matter".
Oops-a-daisy Woody (& Darly & Gorgon & Cachout)!
That document also mentions (in 5.2
Dodds countered with the s.78 of the Evidence Act 1995 (no.2).
78 Exception: lay opinions
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion
expressed by a person if:
(a) the opinion is based on what the person saw, heard or
otherwise perceived about a matter or event; and
(b) evidence of the opinion is necessary to obtain an adequate
account or understanding of the person’s perception of the
matter or event
76 The opinion rule
(1) Evidence of an opinion is not admissible to prove the existence of a
fact about the existence of which the opinion was expressed.
Yet, it appears that new and other teachers (non-doctors) and educators were expected to interpret everything,
within a few short weeks, and make a life-changing decision based upon it!
"I can't put myself in that position", said Dr. Woody,
it, "in a place I haven't been faced with".
Either way Woody or pokey squirmed, Dodds was ready for them (as was just logic)
as the "determination to terminate or charge with misconduct, was D.O.E" driven!
This included people on leave.
The Gorgon's 'determinations' evidence this.
So too, does the special
'MANAGEMENT OF CONDUCT RELATED TO NON-COMPLIANCE WITH COVID-19
VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS GUIDELINES' (M.O.C.R.T.N-C.W.C19.V.R.G)
ironically under headings such as '4.4 Procedural Fairness' (p. 9).
The M.O.C.R.T.N-C.W.C19.V.R.G (even the acronym is laborious)
also addresses the lack of 'delineation between all and individual staff', as asserted (by Dodds) in
'4.7 Deciding each matter on its merits and taking appropriate action' (p.10):
"Disciplinary and remedial processes must be applied consistently, each matter must be treated on its
individual merits and the result in action relevant to the individual matter".
Oops-a-daisy Woody (& Darly & Gorgon & Cachout)!
That document also mentions (in 5.2