On 3 December 2021 the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission (FWC) handed down a significant decision on the fraught topic of the mandating of vaccinations against COVID-19 in a workplace not covered by a Public Health Order. The decision, in CFMMEU, Mr Matthew Howard v Mount Arthur Coal Pty Ltd t/as Mount Arthur Coal, was made in relation to an industrial dispute that was notified to the FWC after the employer introduced a site access requirement (SAR) of vaccination against COVID-19. The SAR directly impacted on more than 724 mine workers, 700 of whom are members of the CFMMEU. The central question determined by the Full Bench was ‘whether the (SAR)…is a lawful and reasonable direction in respect to employees of the Mt Arthur mine who are covered by the Mt Arthur Coal Enterprise Agreement 2019?’. The CFMMEU contended that the SAR had been introduced without complying with the consultation requirements in the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (WHS Act) and in the enterprise agreement, that the employer had not complied with its obligations under the Privacy Act 1988 and the SAR impairs an employee’s right to bodily integrity. The employer contended that it has a duty under the WHS Act to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of its employees and other persons. The Full Bench had regard to the case law with respect to what is a reasonable and lawful direction; in summary, that an employee must obey commands which fall within the scope of the contract and are reasonable and that an employee is not obliged to comply with any command which does not satisfy this criteria. The Full Bench also had regard to the case law regarding consultation; in summary, it needs to be real and not merely formal or perfunctory, management does not have a monopoly on making right decisions, it is not a right of veto but must involve a genuine opportunity to be heard and to persuade and influence the employer. The Full Bench had regard to the wording of an announcement by the employer that ‘the Company will introduce a requirement for COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of entry‘(emphasis added). The Full Bench found that the SAR was not a lawful and reasonable direction because there had not been a meaningful consultation process about it.