More Than a Fifth of Employers Plan to Implement ‘No Jab No Job’ Policy This Year, Survey Finds
A new survey from employment advisory agency Acas has found that more than one in five U.K. employers plan to implement a ‘no jab no job’ policy in the year ahead for both new and existing staff.
Acas commissioned YouGov to ask British businesses about whether they plan to make it a requirement for staff to be vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment.
Acas Chief Executive, Susan Clews, said:
Most workplaces are starting to navigate what working life should look like post-pandemic and it is clear from our poll that most employers have no plans to require staff to be vaccinated. One in five employers want to make it a requirement for staff to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in the year ahead but this is a very tricky area of employment law. It is always best to support staff to get the vaccine rather than insisting that they get it and it’s a good idea for employers to get legal advice before bringing in a vaccine policy. Acas has advice on how best to support staff to get the vaccine and avoid conflict.
Employers were asked whether they planned to implement a ‘no jab no job’ policy for new staff in the year ahead. The poll revealed that:
• more than one in five of employers (22%) said yes
• over half of employers (52%) said no
• 21% said that they do not know or are not sure
• 5% preferred not to say
Employers were also asked whether they planned to implement a ‘no jab no job’ policy for existing staff. The poll showed that:
• more than one in five of employers (21%) said yes
• over half of employers (55%) said no
• 19% said that they do not know or are not sure
• 4% preferred not to say
Acas warns against discrimination and advises that it is best to support staff to get the COVID-19 vaccine rather than requiring them to get it.
There is currently no law in England, Scotland or Wales that says employees must have the vaccine. The Government removed the previous requirements for care home, health and social care staff on March 15th 2022.
If an employer feels it is important for staff to be vaccinated, then they should talk with staff or the organisation’s recognised trade union if they have one. Talking with staff can help to:
• agree a vaccine policy that’s appropriate for both staff and the organisation
• support staff to protect their health
• keep good working relationships
• avoid disputes in the futureThere are some practical ways that employers could support staff such as paying them their usual rate of pay if they are off sick with vaccine side-effects instead of statutory sick pay. Employers could also consider offering staff paid time off for vaccination appointments.
If someone does not want to be vaccinated, then the employer should listen to their concerns. Some people may have health reasons such as an allergic reaction to the vaccine and some employees may have other reasons for not wanting to be vaccinated.
Employers should be sensitive towards personal situations and must be careful to avoid discrimination.
Given the acute worker shortage, with vacancies outnumbering the unemployed for the first time on record, you wouldn’t have thought over a fifth of employers could really afford to tell the unvaccinated they’re not welcome, let alone any legal or ethical considerations.
Of course, we do need to bear in mind that it’s an online YouGov poll, which appear to have consistently overestimated support for restrictions.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
For a disease that mild? People have lost their minds.
If an employer insists on jabbing staff, they would also be responsible for adverse effects, surely?
Apparently someone in a company can insist on your taking a dodgy jab and that’s all ok. But use the wrong pronoun, or make unacceptable inferences about gender and that sort of micro aggression can get the same person into real hot water.
That is the insane world we now inhabit.
Bang on. Truly a sad, insane (literally) world.
Not insane – Evil – as – they now know exactly what they are doing – the irrefutable evidence of death and injury mounts by the day , we are potentially talking about ‘mass murder’ here!
Not just a “dodgy” jab – everyday the evidence mounts of the massive damage being done to the multi-jabbed by the spike proteins in the ‘potion’ they were coerced and blackmailed into taking.Yet more of the same on the way.
It is now a proven fact that the jab is killing and seriously injuring people as Coroners have confirmed . There are long term ‘issues’ such as VAIDS and auto- immune disease- not to mention the possibility of its reactivating and stimulating cancers and inhibiting DNA repair. Then there is the mystery of the “Graphene Oxide”.
All this is now in the public domain. Presumably one fifth of employers either cannot read or simply do not care.
However ,forcing people to take poison as a condition to secure employment is surely still a criminal offence, even in our decadent and deranged “post-moral ” society?
If you amend and suitably tailor this excellent letter, and send it to your employer when faced with such a mandate, would it not place him in a position where s/he cannot force an employee to take it:
An open letter to my pro-jab GP – The Conservative Woman
Any employer planning on implementing “no jab no job” should make themselves aware of the law as it stands. It is very much ILLEGAL for employers to demand any information on health and medical conditions.
Any employee having do deal with a stupid employer should A) let the employer know and B) find someone better to work for as soon as possible.
https://www.gov.uk/personal-data-my-employer-can-keep-about-me
If an employer insists on jabbing staff, they would also be responsible for adverse effects, surely?
Tue question needs to be asked.
My employer did not mandate the jab. Had that happened, my plan was to obtain a meeting with its principal legal advisor to ask whom I should sue in the event of any adverse effects, since the manufacturers of the jabs were refusing to accept legal liability.
Sitting beside my own lawyer, I believed i could make that meeting very unpleasant: assuring them that there would be legal action taken against them, unless they could provide another party for me (or my estate) to sue; and providing them with reams of documentation so that they could not claim ignorance of the nature and danger of known adverse effects.
I don’t know if that would have worked; but it would have been worth trying had a mandate been introduced.
Sop where are the usually so active Human Rights lawyers? Still hiding under their desks?
Good proposed course of action AE. But not everyone can afford the legal threat and the hiring of a lawyer – which I think they are banking on. Hence see my post above, for a more DIY option.
I suppose from the employers perspective the logic goes as thus: My insurance covers me for claims made due to accidents or health “incidents” at work, etc. Now Covid has come along and (albeit falsely) elevated to the status of Public Enemy no.1, I’d better be sure I’m covered for that as well. Not only for insurance purposes, but even from a moral standpoint, employers have been led to believe that not requiring vaccines is an irresponsible, thoughtless negligence of public health, and they can’t abide the thought of being responsible for a local uptick in infections.
This is of course irrelevant since vaccines do virtually diddly squat to stem the spread of infections, but as readers of this site will be well aware, its emotive persuasion that lands the points, however misguided, and not real world data.
And to answer your question, yes, they would (or should) most certainly be responsible for any adverse effects.
There’s enough data now in the public domain, including those documents released by Pfizer under court order, to demonstrate beyond any doubt that the mRNA based vaccines are not ‘safe and effective’ but dangerous and ineffective. There can therefore no longer be any ‘moral’ imperative to mandate or even recommend them. Not only that, it’s also obvious (not that corporate lawyers can see it) that the only age group for which it notionally provides any benefit is those who are 65+, so generally not in employment anyway!
Well my employer is requiring employees to be double jabbed before volunarily returning to the office, as well as requiring covid restrictions at work that seem more inspired by the Chinese zero-covid policy than anything else. No option to prove immunity via previous infection either.
I have complained about this but it’s being run from head-office and my manager has been fighting to open with less restrictions. I really think if they could get away with it they’d be enforcing masks too.
I really can’t understand this attitude when I can do almost anything else without having to worry about covid.
I want to go back to the office, as home working doesn’t really suit me, but it looks like I’ll be working from home for the forseeable future. At least I’m saving on commuting costs.
Find a new employer as you are currently working for a set of idiots.
Idiots? How mild!
The double irony there is that, as you prove, the people most likely to be willing to return and risk their lives mixing with other people, are those who haven’t succumbed to the hype in the first place and don’t care whether those around them are injected, or not…
Injected against what?
It is all a fraudulent psyop – based on one lie (asymptomatic spread) after another lie (it is deadly to everyone – no, only to the elderly and vulnerable) and then another lie (the jabs are safe and effective).
Request them to sign a letter of liability, almost certainly they wouldn’t. No employer can dictate your medical treatment, it is unethical and a complete over reach of their position.
So far my employer has not dared issue any edicts, the company is supposed to be all the bonny things when it comes to ethics and consent, so it could backfire if it was tried.
Well fortunately they’re not requiring us to come back into the office, and thus the jab isn’t mandatory as such. I’ve had to work remotely for two years, so if necessary I could continue that – I don’t see how they could mandate a jab for home working.
If they did require us to come back into the office and be jabbed, then I’d be taking legal advice.
The annoying thing is I had a bad case of Covid last year, and an antibody blood test proved I had the full spectrum of covid antibodies. Almost certainly much better protection than you can get from the jabs, yet that counts for nothing. So much for science.
The government banned these antibody tests in early August 2010. The pharmacist who did my blood test was threatened with closure if he didn’t comply. The Pharmaceutical Society, when approached, said that the government was afraid we’d stop wearing masks if we knew we’d had covid. They also stopped mentioning natural immunity.
That was the point when I knew this was all bulls**t. It was all about the vaccine, which I’ve not had because I have immunity. I had an argument with my GP about this. She said “you can get it again”, to which I replied, “only if you’ve been vaccinated”. She responded with a frustrated “tch!” and I’ve heard nothing since.
I’m assuming you mean August 2020.
You can’t get it again. At most, if unjabbed, your immune system will mount an immune response to a new variant it encounters.
See what Mike Yeadon says on the subject here:
Mike Yeadon has been proved right – we have been lied to – The Conservative Woman
And your life and your freedom and if not vaccinated, you are still human, like me – unlike all of those vaccinated who are neither – see above.
Surely that can be challenged as constructive dismissal?
Not if they are trans human slaves with zero human rights, as above
That is the part I have pushed to be put in place. If you force someone to take a medicine that depending on age & health is more dangerous than beneficial, you should be legally liable for negative outcomes. Seems only fair.
Then again, we still don’t have the right to hold Pfizer et al legally and financially liable for vaccine deaths, or for their fraudulent data.
i had my first two jabs. Both caused wieners amalgamation of side-effects. Got Covid again anyways. Won’t be boostering anyone soon.
IMHO, AKAIK, they will be liable. Every employee faced with such a ‘jab or job’ mandate should have their employer (named manager) served with a solicitor’s letter that they (the manager) will be personally fully responsible for any injury or death, or job loss, and be sued. They cannot hide behind a corporate face. There is either a Union or Law form that specialise in this, but I forget who they are. Of course, the position may be different according to whether you are an existing employee or a prospective one. If the employer claims the jab is necessary to create a ‘safe working environment’, then they should be asked to provide evidence that: (i) unvaccinated people are a higher risk than vaccinated (the UKHSA data says not), (ii) uninfected/asymptomatic people are a risk (hint: asymptomatic transmission is not a thing, has never driven/can’t drive a pandemic, and in response to a FOIA request, the US CDC could not provide a single document to substantiate the claim), (iii) covid-recovered people pose a risk (natural immunity is proven far more effective and long-lasting), (iv) that such policies also apply to flu, which still has tens of thousands of excess deaths per… Read more »
I’d love to see the idiot boss of that plumbing firm, I forget the name, he who likes to apear occasionally on GBNews, have his a**e sued off him in court. I’d pay to see that.
Pimlico plumbers
Nearly a year ago an email dropped into my inbox asking me for my “vaccination” status i emailed back with a few words saying “fully protected” and thanks for their concern.
If they had asked for digital clarification, that would have been a bit trickier.
I sent a company wide reply to mine asking if they should consider making us wear a gold star lol. Was gone a few days later but I have no regrets !!!
Top man!
Sounds like you might have a tribunal claim.
Hilarious 🤣🤣🤣👍
Good for you. Did you quit or did they fire you? Shake the dust off your feet.
Wasn’t there a school that actually did make the “unvaccinated” wear a yellow badge? Worrying times…
Fully protected by my immune system.
That is both the very last thing they want and the very thing they are trying to destroy!
My employer expects you to upload your vaccine status onto our web portal. I have not done so, so I can’t go into the office!
… and your pronouns, I imagine?
‘You’ can mean either ‘me’ (my) or ‘one’ (one’s) in this context in contemporary English usage.
Have you a view about the serious content and implications of what he is actually saying?
Unless the portal is sufficiently secure for classified information you cannot upload medical information.
is that not breach of medical confidentiality???
completely beggars belief.
I really don’t like the sound of your employer at all.
Friend of mine was asked to prove her vaccination status by Bob the builder, before he would carry out repairs to her flat…for which she already pays for, as part of her maintenance contract! He picked the wrong one there as she is a full-on sceptic with plenty of research and knowledge under her belt. She took him and the company to task. They immediately backtracked and her repairs are about to be done, no more questions.
Sp life is about become a daily battle for the right to stay alive!
‘Some people may have health reasons’
My health reasons are I like having health.
Where I work there are several vaxxers that have this insipd low level cough, they complain of feeling fatigued all the time etc.
I make point of being all jolly and full of beans when I am around them as they know I am unjabbed and that I warned them the vaccines were dangerous with unknown side effects etc.
My CEO, who at Christmas was sending out ‘let’s all get jibbed, I just had my third and all I had was a sore arm’ round robins, told me the other day he’d got used to feeling only 80% well.
Not sure he is joining the dots though.
That CEO almost certainly isn’t joining the dots. Here is what happens when people join the dots: One day Herr Keuner was asked just what he meant by ‘reversal of perspective’, and he told the following story. Two brothers, who were deeply attached to one another, once adopted a curious practice. They started using pebbles to record the nature of each day’s events, a white stone for each moment of happiness, a black one for any misfortune or chagrin. They soon discovered, on comparing the contents of their jars of pebbles at the end of each day, that one brother collected only white pebbles, the other only black. Intrigued by the remarkable consistency with which they each experienced a similar fate in a quite different way, they resolved to seek the opinion of an old man famed for his wisdom. “You don’t talk about it enough”, said the wise man. “Each of you should seek the causes of your choices and explain them to the other.”Thenceforward the two brothers followed this advice, and soon found that while the first remained faithful to his white pebbles, and the second to his black ones, in neither of the jars were there now… Read more »
None of them do …however, the dots seem to have a habit of joining themselves up…that’s when they keel over!
🤣👍
Having ‘good health’ is one of the reasons for coercing you to take the ‘vaccine’! ( As we see from current mortality figures after the jab)
BS opinion poll.
Haven’t people caught on by now that “researchers” can manipulate the result of polls by varying the way questions are asked? Poll results are meaningless without a copy of the questionaire and any other information given to the respondents.
And by the way: Don’t we yet realize that “researchers” can easily ensure that a medicine that they don’t like (say one that doesn’t line their pocket$!!) gets bad results? And that they can smooth the way for medicines that they prefer?
We have an amazingly low level of scientific literacy and very little concern about accurate results. People just want to hear that the things they already support are the best, And then they stop their ears and go “Nah nah na nah nah!! Folow the science!! Nah nah!!”
Or they go on the attack like Carol Malone and John Gaunt.
Malone…serious issues… obviously.
Seconded. I don’t believe this “survey” for a second. There are some people (especially journalists) on a lone mission to keep the vaccine BS alive. This is just someone’s lonely wet dream. If any employer actually tried this they would lose half their staff.
I’m a HR Consultant and I think this report/poll is the kind of thing that comes out of the rear end of a bull.
Apart from the minority of employers who are psychopaths/terrified of covid, no one wanted to enforce it last year, let alone now. Care companies have heaved a sigh of relief at the dropping of compulsory vaccination.
I rarely have conversations about covid now, everyone wants to move on and keeping/recruiting staff is such a big problem, employers are not going to put barriers in their way.
Yes! There is a lot stuff being generated by polls, surveys, reports…their sole purpose I think, is to keep a certain level fear burning. After a while you realise it’s just noise.
Are the fines people got from the Police and courts “just noise” ?
Most were dropped.
Except Boris, of course, who got fined £50 for wasting £450Bn.
His defence was “Public School Privilege” – works every time!
Is that what the financial wizards in the Treasury call a ‘Return on Investment’?!!
I said polls, surveys and reports. I wasn’t talking about police fines which are a completely different matter and from what I understand have been mostly dropped.
Everyone should try ignoring EF and blockhead (c68).
and who is promoting/generating the surveys???
Yeah agree
Well it’s going to come rushing back to everyone’s life as soon as the WHO puts the finishing touches to its new pandemic guidelines and their GERM team is set to work
provokingfinding the next pandemic.While everyone “moves on” the psychos that instigated all these transformational societal changes are at work consolidating and expanding their power.
No….that’s not a correct assessment. Some job adverts are specifying “double jabbed” to be employed. They obviously think the ‘booster’ is immaterial, a waste of time or they would demand applicants to be “triple jabbed”.
Well yes, YouGov does discriminate and seek out those it believes will give the ‘right’ or at least ‘preferred’ response which is why I have not had an invitation in 2 years I think it is now. However, it is still sad to see that over 20% of employers have ZERO idea that the jabs are in emergency use, don’t prevent infection, don’t prevent spread and don’t even last that long either otherwise it would be an incredibly easy cost / benefit analysis to make!
Exactly. The level of Employer ignorance on display via this poll is very disturbing.
Disturbing but in my experience believable.
Following this precedent…. Due to the higher risk of workplace AIDS could you also require employees not to be homosexual?
They whoopsies are squirting monkey pox all over the place as well now apparently.
How about insisting workers have a healthy BMI as age and fatness are the two biggest indicators of covid susceptibility.
Maybe a fat reading rather than BMI….some of us are muscular and fail the BMI calculation!
I do not wish to appear gleeful but when an employee feels conned in to this and subsequently suffers and then decides to take his employer to court, perhaps with a union behind him, I suspect there will be a lot of brown trousers in boardrooms.
Bit of a legal minefield.
They’d even be on thin ice with ‘strongly urging’ staff to get vaccinated.
it’s akin to “strongly urging” your secretary to get a boob-job…
Indeed, both of them are about your feelings and happiness.
Yes but almost 4 5ths ain’t .
Reason to be cheerful.
Reason to be cheerful.
…part three.
Hopefully, many more to come.
Summer, Buddy Holly, the working folly
Good golly, Miss Molly and boats…
Dear HR and CEO,
Since you are mandating that I be subject to an unauthorised medical procedure as a condition of continued employment, I must assume that you are jointly personally liable for any and all side effects that arise from your instruction. My willingness to undergo the procedure is proportionate to your willingness to accept liability.
Yours
Mr Taxpayer.
Good answer!
Just when you think it’s all over the gas lighting fires up again!
The 22% might have recruitment problems given the booster uptake lol.
Talk about getting the message 180 degrees wrong!
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-05-covid-mortality-age-patterns-significantly.html
“As more young people got jabbed they died in higher rates, so jab them more…”
I call it the Law of Opposite Effects. We know from this maxim that if proponents say a vaccine will save many children, that it will actually kill many children.
“Acas has advice on how best to support staff to get the vaccine and avoid conflict”:
This is a funny use of the word “support”. To support someone in doing something presupposes that they already wanted to do it, but just needed a bit of support. “Supporting” someone to get a vaccine they don’t want, can only mean coercing them into doing so.
I mean what are they going to do, hold their hand on the way to the vaccination centre? The reality will be much in the way of guilt-tripping and urging and preferential hiring of vaccinated applicants over unvaccinated ones.
That is the kind of “support” we’re talking about.
It goes along with recent articles saying parents are ‘hesitating’ about giving their young children the jab. Hesitating implies that they’re going to, eventually. I think, and fervently hope, that they’re not hesitating, they’re saying sod off.
I heard an advert on BBC Radio and it mentioned ‘vaccine hesitancy in Sports’. The real question should be….Why so many sports stars are collapsing since 2021. The BBC are corrupt to the core.
There may be a very good reason, perhaps even nothing to do with the injections. The problem is that the ‘investigative journalists’ don’t appear to have even the slightest curiosity about it…
I’m not hesitant – no, not at all.
I’m bloody determined that they will not inject me with anything for this current “virus” or any to come that they care to fear monger about.
Support depressed people by giving them a lift to Beachy head…
Some new speak definitions – support means threaten , hesitant means a kicking and screaming no effing way fit and investigative journalism means blind obedience to authority.
If you want to be a bigot acting in clear contradiction to discrimination laws, it would be more logical to only recruit the unjabbed.
Please can we get a list of the companies so I can boycott all of them!
IKEA would be one guess.
And what will be their definition of vaccinated? Had a jab at any time? Had 2 jabs? Had 3 jabs? Had 27 jabs?. Do they mean someone who had a needle in their arm at some point but now has no or negative immunity? This is pure fear-fuelled compliance/control and is completely non-scientific
That’s why arguing over whether the WHO is a treaty or not is a moot point, when there’s so many authoritarians about.
IT IS ALL COMPLETELY NON-SCIENTIFIC
WHY?
If this is true and legal then two things may happen:
1. They will lose most of their staff with an IQ of more than 50.
2. Those that remain will constantly be taking time off to recover from mild illness’s.
Either way their bankers will be calling in their loans, as per. (Unless of course they are being funded by the tax payer).
Interesting re number 2. I know from my own experience that the multi-jabbed at the office are frequently off with “covid” (that really boils my piss BTW – it’s SARS-CoV-2 at worst, not effing covid), and recently their spells of illness seem to have extended beyond a week. If my employer ever tried to pull this (they won’t) it’d be interesting using their own HR sickness data against them (they have been collecting data on who has had experimental jabs so easy to correlate).
I have to pull you up here, this isn’t about someone’s IQ, not at all. It’s about how discerning people are or how much they think critically for themselves or even maybe how intuitive they are. I know people that would score pretty low on a IQ test who just get that this doesn’t make sense and I know people with really high IQs, high salaries and status who just go along with the whole thing. THIS IS NOT ABOUT IQs – having a high IQ is over rated.
All I could think of at the time. Not 100% certain what category willing recepients of the experimental gene transfer technology fall into. You are right though, thinking about it more carefully, IQ status appears to be irrelevant.
If the company I work for try this one I’ll immediately state that
I appreciate the principle, but citing the Nuremburg Code is akin to Freementals on the Land howling spells evoking Magna Carta, and that they’re not a ship and will not stand in an “Admiralty dock”.
It’s not a law, it’s a buffet of guidelines.
No government will ever put itself on trial over covid.
There was one manager at work who asked that, if he went into one of our offices, he could have a guarantee that all people would be jabbed and the un-jabbed would not be allowed in. I didn’t like to say he was asking for a fair run at a death sentence.
It could get interesting if he collapses and I ask him “I’m not jabbed, still want the kiss of life and for me to save you from the fire?” since I’m a qualified first aider and fire marshal.
That reminds me of Yasmin Alibhai–Brown. She didn’t want to be treated by anyone ‘unvaccinated’. Then again, she said if vote leave win she will leave the country….Why is she still here.
It’s not as if breathing tanks can’t fit under chemical warfare suits. Is he averse to wearing turquoise wellies?
🤣
WTF!!!!!
His clot shot doesn’t protect him, but your clot shot protects both of you?
These pollsters are so behind the times 🧐
ACAS chief executive says
Yes, sure, love – you do a proper job and you want everyone to know.
This is classic “Hey, look what might be going on” propaganda. ACAS by the way is a government body.
The lesson to draw here is that if you’re an employee who is threatened with the sack, or who has been given the sack, because you’re unvaccinated, then don’t expect any support from ACAS.
Once there’s a case judgement on the issue of can you be sacked or not for being unvaccinated, it won’t be ever so “tricky-wicky” law any more.
What I would like to know is what is Big Insurance telling employers (including state sector ones) about this issue? (But that information is probably way above Susan Clews’s pay grade.)
From experience of ACAS:
“Do what your employer tells you.”
The elephant in the room is the massive liability these companies and organizations could (and should) face for either mandating these jabs or using coercion to get their employees vaccinated. Plus, you have all the employees they have already fired. In a just world, the plaintiffs lawyers would have already sprung into action and be filing lawsuit after lawsuit that could bankrupt every one of these companies. Yes, I guess, governments can pass laws that wave liability for the manufacturers of these vaccines (Big Pharma). But can companies and bureaucracies MANDATE that employees take shots many of these employees believe are dangerous (and that provide no real benefit)? Apparently they CAN because do this because they HAVE done just this. The irony is none of these companies would have faced any liability if they had simply left it up to their employees to make their own health decisions. It’s also a “great tell” that these big law firms – that have ample experience proving harm in other cases – won’t do this with the Covid “vaccines.” This tells me they know where their toast is buttered; they know they have a lucrative business in filing the lawsuits they do file… Read more »
It’s the same old saw. These law firms can’t be allowed to file ONE wrongful death or personal injury lawsuit … because if they file one … and it’s successful and brings about a huge judgment … the floodgates will be open and the precedent will have been established that every company that did this was also just as liable.
Plus, the legal system is completely captured and won’t allow any such verdicts to stand.
But just like I blame the “watchdog” press for not doing its job, I also blame these plaintiff trial law firms for not doing their most important job as well.
It’s okay to sue a trucking company when one of its 18-wheeler’s causes the death of a motorist. It’s okay to sue a company that exposed its employees to asbestos that supposedly caused terrible health effects years later.
Every day such suits are filed. Every time I turn on my TV I see commercials soliciting victims who have been harmed by these activities. But lawyers CANNOT sue the same companies if they made their employees get these vaccines, which will end up killing and harming many more people.
Our “justice system” is not “just.” This is one of the many truths that people simply can’t handle.
Surely your vaccination status is private an no one’s business.
That’s the theory.
But like most theories, it’s nonsense.
Next time, please start by telling us that it’s a WuGov poll.
If WuGov hasn’t long since been captured and controlled by Chinese astroturfers, I’d like to know why not. They lack the technology? The manpower? They’re too ethical?
Off topic, but yesterday a friend, (who’s a member of a sporting club, for a sport popular amongst the elderly) annouced yesterday that a member of the club had collapsed whilst playing and had been taken to hospital.
We were informed that on admission to hospital he had been tested positive for covid as if that explained his collapse. Not he had a heart attack or stroke but he tested positive for covid. I wonder if he’d been triple or quadruple vaccinated?
Thermal cycles set to 50 no doubt – surely the standard setting when someone has a heart attack or stroke.
Does anybody know what PCR cycles the NHS were using, I’ve heard some say around 40 cycles?
40-45 cycles
My line manager was ‘giving it large’ about how unvaxxed staff should only get SSP if off work for any reason, not just the Rona. I called in sick the next day with a genuine (non-Rona related illness) to remind them that no, this is not company policy (not yet anyway!). I thoroughly enjoyed my few weeks on the sick, making up for all the time I DID NOT take off for allegedly having the sniffles, unlike my line manager!
80% of Employers Given Huge Opportunity to Hire Staff with Critical Thinking, Survey Finds
🤣
Simple.
If there is no alternative to you having or keeping that particular job :-
Write and say that you do not want the jab because you are concerned about the implications for your health but that the sole reason for you having it is to have or keep the job.
AND that if you do suffer health consequences as a result, you will look to the employer for compensation.
Employers insurers are going to be busy methinks.
Disclaimer.
This assumes that Clown World does not affect Common Law and Employment Law – as it stands currently…