Those whose work is threatened need to keep the line


Proponents of the Vaccine Directive and the pursuit of the Impossible Dream of “Zero COVID” effectively portrayed those who opposed it as a butterfly nut conspiracy theorist.

However, our boutique Ottawa law firm, where we focus on human rights and charter proceedings, is flooded with requests for legal assistance regarding vaccine obligations. They come from Canadians in every step of their lives. We have never seen anything like that. We know that other law firms also receive such calls.

The majority are from nurses, doctors, civil servants, teachers and college students. Given their roles and responsibilities, if they are all wing nuts, there is an even bigger problem in Canada than COVID presents.

In fact, they are educated and intelligent people, and there is a thoughtful reason for not wanting this vaccine at this time. They are rational people who are willing to wear masks, self-screen their symptoms, and have a rapid antigen test before they arrive at the scene. They are willing to accept the reasonable accommodation that was central to Canadian human rights law.

Curiously, strangely, no one pays attention to them other than threatening professional and personal punishment. Think about it, especially if you’re a healthcare professional.

If 15% of stock brokers suddenly drop stocks from their portfolio, do people wonder what they know? Of course you will. So why not ask why so many healthcare professionals are hesitant about vaccines? Do they know what we don’t know? Do they see in their work what we are unaware of or what the media is not reporting?

We must be careful when so many people in the field reject public stories. It is foolish to dismiss them as crazy conspirators.

The problem we face as lawyers is that the frauds faced by those who do not want vaccination are best resolved through politics, not proceedings. Indeed, some lawyers have issued bold public statements about the illegality of workplace vaccine policies and government obligations. Without further evidence, we never doubt their motivation. However, the unfortunate side effects of such a declaration can mislead those with a strong feeling that their obligations are unjust and unjust, as they believe there is a clear all-purpose legal solution, which is no longer present. There is sex.

In our practice, we want to give confidence to callers who dislike vaccines facing unemployment or dropouts from college about the Slam Dunk proceedings. Sadly, we suspect that relief for people whose work is in progress will come from court, or at least it will come early enough.

Indeed, important legal principles support those who believe that governments and employers should not force workers to inject substances into their bodies. The people who call us have been doing their job well for months. Their employers clearly believed that it was safe for them to work, even before vaccination and rapid testing became readily available. These people should no longer be fired.

However, so many months of COVID-19 myopia by the media, politicians, and government have made it much harder to win proceedings for the benefit of workers’ autonomy and privacy. Yesterday’s health care hero is today’s public Paria. It’s a challenging story to change.

But there are signs that change lies in economics and politics, not in proceedings. The Quebec government first withdrew its obligation to vaccinate by delaying its enforcement, then abandoned it when thousands of nurses lined up and dared to let the government take on their job. Did. Weiser’s political chief found it ridiculous to cripple health care “for public health.”

The situation in Quebec shows that employers cannot sacrifice a significant proportion of their workforce without serious adverse effects. That’s why unions use strikes.

So what do governments and employers need to respect workers’ rights? As in Quebec, it should be recognized that a significant proportion of employees will not succumb to pressure from the general public and politicians. Vaccine obligations can only last as long as people are together. One of the monetary negotiations, and one of the things companies are afraid of over COVID-19, or canceling culture, is the loss of profits.

Be courageous to the rational and rational Canadians who are currently working to decide not to be vaccinated. you are not alone. Our anecdotal experience confirms that you are far more than you think.

Stand on the witness stand. If you are dismissed, you may cause an incident. You may be entitled to damages. That is when you can pursue a proceeding. Meanwhile, your labor is the power of your lever. United, you are essential.

Albertos Polizogopoulos and John Sikkema are constitutional and human rights lawyers for the Acacia Group, a legal and strategic communications company.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Albertos Polisogo poulos


Albertos Polizogopoulos is the Constitutional and Human Rights Litigation Officer of the Acacia Group, a legal and strategic communications company.

John Sickema


John Sikkema is the Constitutional and Human Rights Litigation Officer of The Acacia Group, a legal and strategic communications company.

Posted on