What do you do if your boss tells you that unless you get the covid vaccine you will be dismissed?\u00a0 What are your options?\u00a0 I offer some suggestions below; they are for educational purposes only.\u00a0 They should not be considered legal advice. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.<\/p>\r\n
Firstly, we have a dilemma because governments in different countries have subverted due process, judiciary, and parliamentary-legislative scrutiny by invoking Emergency Laws.<\/strong> In the USA this is known as PREP Act (The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act provides immunity from liability to certain individuals and entities, including manufacturers, distributors, program planners and those who prescribe, administer, and dispense medical countermeasures that constitute a qualified pandemic or epidemic product during a Public Health Emergency (\u201cCovered Countermeasures\u201d), including FDA-authorized vaccines. This immunity is granted against all claims for any type of loss, including death, physical or mental injury, fear of injury, and property damage, excluding claims involving \u201cwilful misconduct<\/strong>.\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0 So, although you might not gain immunity, (in fact you might be paralysed or die) they have (legal) immunity.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n National constitutions and international human rights treaties often contain clauses that allow governments to temporarily suspend<\/strong> their obligations in a time of crisis. They can invoke special powers <\/strong>that would normally be considered infringements on liberty.[2]<\/a><\/p>\r\n So, every country has its own version of \u2026\u2026you must do as you are told because it is an emergency<\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In other words, they are telling you that you have no rights not even over your own body.<\/strong>\u00a0 They can do whatever they like because collective safety<\/strong> is under threat.\u00a0 \u00a0This is very clever but that means they must offer independent scientific proof to a court of law that we are in a pandemic.\u00a0 We cannot live under \u201cemergency\u201d laws indefinitely. \u00a0At some point they must legally and scientifically justify their emergency provisions.\u00a0 The situation is dynamic and now that more data is available former hasty decisions should be re-evaluated.\u00a0 \u00a0 However, the WHO has changed the definition of pandemic and changed the definition of herd immunity. <\/strong>\u00a0Governments have also moved the goalposts (two weeks to flatten the curve) and the public has faced an onslaught of propaganda and \u201cbehavioral science\u201d.\u00a0 There is therefore ample evidence of wilful misconduct<\/strong> which invalidates legal immunity because it constitutes criminal behavior.\u00a0 They are not acting in good faith.<\/em> The law cannot be used as a cloak to cover malign misdeeds perpetrated by corporations and governments.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Then there is the question of the origin and timing of the virus at the very point when the world faced economic collapse (signified by inter-bank lending; REPO). \u00a0\u00a0There is enough prima facie<\/em> evidence to raise suspicions and for any reasonable individual to question the use of emergency laws that justify force (mandatory vaccines), loss of liberty (lockdown) and proscribed quasi-medical (social) interventions (masks and distancing). \u00a0There are numerous court challenges underway in different jurisdictions, but they are fighting an uphill battle against a global judicial system that has been corrupted and captured.<\/p>\r\n It is difficult to make sweeping assertions because every country is different but Western \u201cdemocracies\u201d have similar legal frameworks so here follows some general observations. For example, if an employer asks you to operate a machine or engage in a process, they must do a Risk Assessment<\/strong> and a Cost Benefit Analysis<\/strong>.\u00a0 Just because we are under \u201cemergency laws\u201d an employer cannot ask you to operate a machine without safety guards that he knows will kill you. Neither can they terminate you for refusing to engage in something that will harm you. The health and safety laws provide offenses for engaging in discriminatory conduct for prohibited reasons.\u00a0 In some countries discriminatory conduct can lead to civil proceedings being brought by the persons affected for compensation (or injunctive relief).<\/p>\r\n Moreover, the employer must provide a Risk Assessment.\u00a0 You have a right to ask to see the Risk Assessment. It must include all the relevant information such as side effects and morbidity including long term effects (which are at this time unknown).[3]<\/a> However, that is a complex issue, and your employer is unlikely to be able to provide you with an unbiased, transparent evaluation of the risks. Even the EU is struggling to define the risks:<\/p>\r\n The Risk Assessment must examine the cost benefits of all options.\u00a0 For example, what sort of safety guards are available on the cutting machine and how efficient are they?\u00a0\u00a0 Can we automate the process completely to avoid injury?\u00a0 If we apply this to vaccines that means that we must examine the merits of each vaccine and we must also examine the benefits of alternative treatments.\u00a0 In India they are having success with Ivermectin and large doses of Vitamin D and C with zinc and antibiotics.\u00a0 Cheap and effective. There are also other cheap and less dangerous treatments. Why are these not mandatory?<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0 The vaccines do not provide guaranteed protection from catching covid or even from spreading the disease<\/em>.\u00a0 So, what benefit do these emergency vaccines provide?<\/strong> \u00a0It seems that the costs outweigh the benefits. Moreover, the risks are not uniform as underlying medical conditions or pregnancy can amplify risk. \u00a0Even the WHO admits the need to balance vaccine efficacy and vaccine safety by conducting risk\/benefit assessments and to consider contextual issues (economics, availability of alternative vaccines, sociopolitical and cultural factors). But note that although they mention “alternative vaccines” they do not mention alternative treatments.[5]<\/a><\/p>\r\n A legal statement\/contract needs to be drafted that allows that vaccination will be considered<\/strong> if certain conditions are forthcoming.<\/p>\r\n Consult a lawyer or solicitor in your country to draw up a legal document and make sure that your employer knows that they have skin in the game<\/strong>.\u00a0 The document needs to be acknowledged, witnessed and signed. If you have a Union get them involved and your Health and Safety Executive. Remind them that they could be personally sued or charged if something goes wrong. The Nuremberg defense will not stand.<\/strong> If anyone can come up with a good document drafted by a legal professional let me know (DM on twitter).\u00a0 If you allow the Government\/employer to dictate medical intervention, then you will have established a precedent. This will be the first of many such vaccines. You will have lost sovereignty over your body. Your body your choice<\/strong> but the choice should not be between your health or your job.<\/p>\r\n [1]<\/a> Overview of Legal and Practical Considerations for Employers Concerning COVID-19 Vaccination Policies<\/p>\r\n https:\/\/www.lexology.com\/library\/detail.aspx?g=ad663a10-e124-4706-afd3-bcc32f8c0958<\/a><\/p>\r\n [2]<\/a> State of emergency: how different countries are invoking extra powers to stop the\u00a0coronavirus <\/strong>https:\/\/theconversation.com\/state-of-emergency-how-different-countries-are-invoking-extra-powers-to-stop-the-coronavirus-134495<\/a><\/p>\r\n [3]<\/a> Sterility and cancers. Not only acute effects, but vaccination (as any intervention) can shorten long-term life expectancy. https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s40264-020-00984-7<\/a>\u00a0 One potential adverse event is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a type of immune reaction where vaccination makes subsequent exposure to the virus more dangerous. The condition \u2013 which has been observed with vaccines for measles, respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus, as well as in animal models for the original Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (Sars) virus \u2013 occurs when the body, primed by a vaccine, generates antibodies that don\u2019t sufficiently neutralise the virus when later exposed to it and instead encourage the virus into cells to replicate, exacerbating the disease.<\/p>\r\n [4]<\/a> Accelerated Development of Vaccine benefit-risk Collaboration in Europe.<\/p>\r\n https:\/\/vac4eu.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/ADVANCE_D4.3appraisal_benefit_risk-methods.pdf<\/a><\/p>\r\n [5]<\/a> WHO Vaccine Safety Basics e-learning course<\/p>\r\nHealth and Safety laws<\/h2>\r\n
\u201cEvaluating benefits and risks is however, a complex exercise. It involves the integration of data and information from different sources, typically associated with different levels of uncertainty. In addition, measuring the benefit-risk balance is to a certain extent subjective as it involves value judgements for gaining certain benefits versus avoiding certain risks\u201d.[4]<\/a><\/pre>\r\n
Strategy<\/h2>\r\n
\r\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\r\n