{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/69dc3851361823b7813197bc/6a5e255119fcc7b0d0237849?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"The Feb 26 Letter That Could Decide Jackie’s Case","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/69dc3851361823b7813197bc/1784554798964-f1fc678f-c25b-4129-9006-f58d70f7c12f.jpeg?height=200","description":"<p>Everything now appears to come back to one document: Jackie Henderson's complaint letter to ARN on 26 February.</p><p>In this episode, workplace relations lawyer, Michael Byrnes, explains why ARN's amended defence has shifted the battleground away from the on-air argument and onto Jackie's motivation for writing that letter.</p><p>Did Jackie genuinely raise workplace concerns? Or had she already decided to leave breakfast before the complaint was made?</p><p>Michael breaks down \"good faith\" in plain English, explains why the timing matters so much, and takes us inside Jackie's court-ordered medical examination and how much weight the report could carry.</p>","author_name":"Game Changers: Radio"}