It sounds like Big Dave wants out, he’s probably been tapped up, think most of the competition would like him, regardless of the current situation. Good luck with all this terrible CV19 to all our friends in rugby league.

Employers are under a duty to make reasonable adjustments for employees who suffer a disability. For these purposes a "disability" is any physical or mental impairment which has a substantial, long-term effect on an employee's ability to carry out their day to day activities. As well as the more obvious adjustments (such as to enable access to premises, or the provision of auxiliary aids), the duty to make reasonable adjustments is also required where an employer applies a "provision, criterion or practice" to an employee which substantially disadvantages a disabled employee as compared to those who are not.

In the context of COVID-19, requiring employees to attend the workplace (even if appropriate health and safety measures have been implemented) would likely constitute a "provision, criterion or practice" which would disproportionately affect employees who are vulnerable due to health concerns. Such employees may have a higher risk of infection and/or a higher risk of negative outcomes if they are infected. Some employees may also be newly disabled following infection by COVID-19 (i.e. if they are expected to have on-going long-term health implications). In these cases, it will be incumbent on the employer to consider what reasonable adjustments can be made. Continued working from home may be reasonable in many cases. Employers should also consider whether any additional PPE should be provided to disabled employees who cannot work from home, and whether there are other additional steps that can be taken to afford a higher level of protection to these employees.

Some employers may also encounter employees whose religion and belief includes a requirement which is not entirely compatible with PPE (for example, wearing a beard or a turban may impede the use of masks). Requiring an employee to shave their beard or remove their turban could give rise to potential indirect discrimination claims. In these circumstances, the employer is likely to have a legitimate aim (i.e. health and safety), however, the question will be whether their proposed approach is proportionate. Consideration should be given to whether other types of PPE could be used which would be more effective, notwithstanding the employee's beard or clothing, and also whether duties can be modified to lower the potential risk faced by the employee.

It sounds more like Big Dave got away with being an exception when it wasn't compulsory because he brought a lot to the team and it was okay to ignore it, but now it is compulsory he is demanding to be still treated differently but isn't allowed to do so.

Uncomfortable or whatever, we are getting the game going for the benefit of the game, something that has provided him with an income, and for the sake of the British game, which has turned him from a fringe player at Cronulla to the main focus of a super league side. If he won't take one for the team, it won't bother me if he doesn't play in a Wakey shirt again.

Exactly how I see things.

Me too

What I said was one of them is not telling the whole truth. The question is when the use became compulsory did he ask for a smaller version if so then why was this not stated in the CEO statement. If he didn’t then the club need to confirm this and then we know who was being inaccurate.

Why do they, who exactly do you think you are?

Perhaps some discussions stay behind closed doors?

I agree but it’s difficult to stay behind closed doors when one of the parties make a statement to the press. I and many others would not have cared if the statement had not referenced his standing down and the reason why, this was then followed by his contrary statement that he requested a smaller device which the club did not provide. If you are happy to accept everything on face value can I suggest to you that the earth is flat or that the moon is made of green cheese.

Club: "you have to wear one of these now. It's compulsory, Dave"
Dave: "you know I don't like them. Get me a smaller one and I'll think about it. Until then, no."

Not sure the club needs to do anything. Wakey's top earner not doing his bit, as far as I see it. As he doesn't bring as much to the team as he used to, the club are right to reassess his demands and refusals.

Don't forget also you talk a load of rubbish I accept that old cocker

Can I just remind you that you wrote the analogy

Health and Safety requires removal of the risk and if that is not possible a fully risk assessed alternative can be considered which could be a change in working practise, grills or shield along with PPE and they would have to cooperate 'reasonable adjustment' is not a method used in safety. Your goggles fearing chap would lose a tribunal, assuming he has the money to start it

Even though you have added a few extra bits to the initial post and the task before it escalated you still come up with the the wrong answer but his safety is paramount and if the only way to guarantee it is to remove him from the task so be it, no doubt they would seek to find another role in the company to suit someone with a fear of safety goggles.

As for 'reasonable adjustments' I am assuming you've picked this up from the Equality Act which requires employers do this for people who may need additional support in the work place be for people with disabilities.

The analogy is well and good to keep Scarlett happy but it doesn't apply in this case.

No one has been sacked so there is no tribunal

A better analogy would be that the employer said they couldn't do that job any more because it wasn't safe so asked them to work in the office for the same money.

The issue will be when the contract is up for review. No tribunal for not renewing a contract.

I hope we sort it all out amicably and Dave can get back to playing but at the moment he has made his position clear by not wearing the tracker.
Seems like a pointless point of principle to me.

Nothing stopping Dave or his agent releasing a statement. Isn't his agent Harrison? He's never short of an opinion on everything.