Defending against medical coersion at work

Can legal minds weigh in on this sample letter, does it seem useful, if this uncomfortable conversation is forced upon you?
@MikeBKY

Dear Boss,

Compelling any employee to take any current Covid-19 vaccine violates federal and state law.

First, federal law prohibits any mandate of the Covid-19 vaccines as unlicensed, emergency-use-authorization-only vaccines. Subsection bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) of section 360 of Title 21 of the United States Code, otherwise known as the Emergency Use Authorization section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, demands that everyone give employees the “option to accept or refuse administration” of the Covid-19 vaccine. ( [ … ](https://www.law.cornell<span class=) ) This right to refuse emergency, experimental vaccines, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. ( The Nuremberg Code ). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must “be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision” for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is. The Nuremberg Code prohibited even the military from requiring such experimental vaccines. (Doe #1 v. Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (D.D.C. 2003).

Secondly, demanding employees divulge their personal medical information invades their protected right to privacy, and discriminates against them based on their perceived medical status, in contravention of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (42 USC §12112(a).)

Third, conditioning continued employment upon participating in a medical experiment and demanding disclosure of private, personal medical information, may also create employer liability under other federal and state laws, including HIPAA, FMLA, and applicable state tort law principles, including torts prohibiting and proscribing invasions of privacy and battery. Indeed, any employer mandating a vaccine is liable to their employee for any adverse event suffered by that employee. ( COVID-19 - Frequently Asked Questions | Occupational Safety and Health Administration ). The CDC records reports of the adverse events already reported to date concerning the current Covid-19 vaccine.( Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) | CDC )

With Regards,

Employee of the Year

15 Likes

It’s going to be a while before this will be legally determined. There’s at least a couple of legal challenges in process now.

I am not a lawyer and do not have any legal background. Just sharing what I’ve found because the subject is of interest to me.

While the government cannot force you to get the vaccine there is no clear guidance on whether employers can or cannot mandate vaccinations as a requirement for employment. It’s not a HIPAA violation to request your vaccination status (you provide more sensitive medial information to sign up for health insurance). It only becomes a violation if they disclose the information without your permission.

Most employer-employee relationship is “at will”, which means, either party can terminate employment for any reason. While a lot of employers are not making the vaccine mandatory at this time especially for those that have the option to work remotely, some are starting to require it for people who have to work in a shared physical location like an office building or for jobs that have contact with others (patients, customers, etc).

1 Like

Kind of a tangent, but I’m wondering why you would not want to be vaccinated?

4 Likes

Vaccinated. With a vaccine. Not an experimental drug with emergency approval only. I am not a guinea pig.
Try to inject someone with anything not properly approved by the FDA => jail.
Try to practice medicine without a licence (like our wonderful politicians and athletes do) => jail

16 Likes

Sorry, but I’m not understanding you. Are you saying you are vaccinated?

I see the conundrum. When you factor in skepticism of all vaccines, this vaccine, mistrust of government, and violation of rights it is a tricky situation.

I let Uncle Same stick me with all kinds of needles for 22 years and did not have a choice. Therefore I’m not particularly adverse to shots.

I recognize the current situation with CDC and other government entities; Federal, State, Local + private businesses interpreting shot & mask requirements. It is a mess.

I have chosen to comply when reminded of a line in a John Wayne movie, “Is this the hill you want to die on” (might be Sands of Iwo Jima , might not) I’m sure I’ll get corrected if it’s not!

4 Likes

Thanks, George, for reminding us of where we exist in history.

Despite the considerations you raise, the fact remains that the science behind the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and the results of the clinical trials is very sound. Efficacy for the post-vaccinated population is excellent for both.

Given that, I just wonder why people would not want to be vaccinated?

2 Likes

As you correctly noted, CDC has lost all credibility on this issue. Any official discussion on the subject is now dominated by dogmatic thinking, open threats and censorship. Not exactly an atmosphere that promotes compliance. In fact, it promotes resentment, sabotage and dishonesty.

14 Likes

Clinical trial for vaccines usually last for years (3–4 years on the low end), which allows any long-term issue to surface. We are 2.5 to 3 years from any conclusions on this vaccine. At this point only acute problems are evident, and chronic health consequences - if any exist - have not yet developed. So what is it that you call “results”?

As far as efficacy… This is why they are talking getting booster shots every 6 month, because the “vaccine” is so wonderfully “efficient”, right?

Just saying, not really intending to change anyone’s mind.

14 Likes

The breakthrough rate for vaccinated people is O.06 percent, nearly two orders of magnitude less than the infection rate for unvaccinated people.

Not really intending to change anyone’s mind here, either. It’s more just a curiosity on my part as to why people wouldn’t want to get vaccinated. Thanks for providing your point of view.

1 Like

0.06% if they are exposed to the same strain of the virus. What we see in reality, is a quick change from UK to South African, to Indian, etc. strains. This kaleidoscope never stops, just like seasonal flu, or seasonal colds.
If you cannot get sick once injected, why do owners and promoters of this medication keep speaking of boosters, annual, 6-month kind. Are they set on ruining the reputation of their product in the eyes of the public?

6 Likes

Well how else is Bill Gates going to deploy his microchip tracker sterilizers?

9 Likes

And the more people get whatever strain the more chances it mutates AGAIN into something even more contagious, deadly, etc…
I’ll take .06 % over anything higher than that.
Jonas Salk didn’t wait 3-4 years before sticking his own kids with his polio vaccine. He’s considered a visionary & a genius.

2 Likes

Actually, it is the opposite. Viral deceases always mutate toward milder symptoms, or even disappear.

That’s break through rate. a) you don’t know how long this number will hold; b) you forgot to account for the unknown risk factors due to insufficient study time of this vaccine.

Did you notice the super-important part? If Jonas Salk chased after other folks’ kids with his polio shot, there may not have been a Jonas Salk. I’d like to refer you to the very 1st post in this thread, about Nuremberg Trial.

4 Likes

I heard that 20% of the population is naturally immune to the virus. I know people that were heavily and even deathly affected by the virus. I also know people that were mildly affect - possibly immune to it.

2 Likes

1st, that is incorrect. Diseases are living organisms. They evolve in order to live ‘better’ (ie, longer, more widespread) 2nd, if diseases always mutate to less virulent strains, then why would you bring up the more virulent lineages from around the world?
Look into the history of Ebola.
First it was Ebola Congo, approx 50% mortality rate.
That evolved into Ebola Mayinga which had over a 90% rate & was fatal in under a week. Since that was killing hosts too quickly for the virus to spread, it changed again into Ebola Zaire with a 76% mortality & longer incubation period.
Nice happy medium…

2 Likes

I heard that 40% of the population believes what they see on the internet.

5 Likes

Effin Fauci, the World Health Organization, the CDC, and many others have been inconsistent to the point that their credibility took a hit.

I don’t get flu shots, haven’t gotten the flu.
Won’t get the covid vaccine either.

Employer has been careful in saying that we’re not required to get the vaccine but when we reopen the office, those who haven’t been vaccinated will most likely continue working from home.

13 Likes

CV19 has >98% survival rate, not mortality. It is not Ebola, nor even from the same family as Ebola. Not same threat, not the same alarm.

7 Likes

Which brings us back to the original question. Is there a legal framework to thwart employers’ question or personnel action on the basis of private medical info.

2 Likes