No EI for the unvaccinated

[Sparki55]

This is hardly the fault of government though. A sudden and rapidly evolving health crisis has stretched resources to the limit, I see trying to dump blame for that on the government as a complete cop-out. Is there not some societal responsibility upon all of us the do what we can to prevent unnecessary increases to the load our healthcare system is currently experiencing ?

They were warned for years and learned nothing about west Nile, SARS, H1N1, MERS and ZIKA.

It was completely expected. We we warned for years and kept hospitals at near 100% capacity.

There is not a societal responsibility to do anything. The only responsibly we can all agree on is do not harm and that only extends to stealing, murdering, etc. Not risking ones own personal safety no matter how small the risk in an effort some greater good.

[erinmore3775]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavir ... -1.5569971

Below is a quote from an article on whether a Charter challenge on vaccine mandates would be successful. While the Charter does protect from infringements due to sex, race, or diability, it does not protect against a perceived infringement based on a personal choice.


"Before we dive into the fine print, it’s important to note that both of our experts agree nothing is certain in the law. Certainly, if someone wanted to challenge the government over the charter, they could. But they say successfully arguing such a case is very unlikely.

As Cheryl Milne, executive director of the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights at the University of Toronto explains, a charter argument may apply under Section 15, which discusses equality, for someone with a disability who cannot get vaccinated. Or under Section 2, which deals with freedom of religion and expression.

But Milne points out there are very few circumstances in which people cannot be vaccinated and have sound proof of that.

Vaccine mandates are not “forced vaccination”

Would-be claimants would face multiple hurdles to prove their case. The first would involve establishing an infringement of a protected interest in “life, liberty or security of the person.”

But, contrary to claims otherwise, vaccine mandates do not constitute forced vaccination."


In Canada, whether a person is vaccinated is a free choice. Like all other choices protected under the Charter, that choice has risks, responsibilities, and consequences. If a person chooses not to be vaccinated, they are freely choosing to live within certain societal and social constraints. It also means that they may be opting out of various social nets.

The moral questions around vaccines, vaccine mandates, and the burden COVID places on our overburdened medical system is one for ethics professors. They can argue the values of those who opt in and out of societal programs. However, what I believe is that both sides arguing these points would agree is that responsibilities and consequences are tied to these moral choices.

[GordonH]

Governor in Council needs to have the Justices of Supreme Court of Canada make a ruling on the Vaccination Mandate, to actually see if it is Constitutional or not.

If not then stop it in it’s tracks NOW, both Federally & Provincially.

That is not the governor general's duty.

Actually it is read the following:

Constitutional interpretation
The Supreme Court thus performs a unique function. It can be asked by the Governor-in-Council to hear references considering important questions of law. Such referrals may concern the constitutionality or interpretation of federal or provincial legislation, or the division of powers between federal and provincial spheres of government. Any point of law may be referred in this manner.

This is from here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Canada

[crookedmember]

The Supreme Court will have nothing to do with the issue because mandates are not forced vaccinations.

The mandates give people a choice. If you don't want to eat in a restaurant, you don't need to get the vaccine. If you don't want to get on a plane, you don't need the vaccine. If you don't need your cushy government job, you don't need the vaccine.

So don't hold your breath waiting for the Supreme Court to get involved.

[GordonH]

The Supreme Court will have nothing to do with the issue because mandates are not forced vaccinations.

The mandates give people a choice. If you don't want to eat in a restaurant, you don't need to get the vaccine. If you don't want to get on a plane, you don't need the vaccine. If you don't need your cushy government job, you don't need the vaccine.

So don't hold your breath waiting for the Supreme Court to get involved.

People are so easily willing throw away their rights, it a amazes me.
Begs the the question why is government pushing so damn hard on this vaccination program. I suspect ccp is laughing on how easily the North Americans crumbled.

[crookedmember]

People are so easily willing throw away their rights, it a amazes me.

People have no "rights" to harm their fellow employees because they don't like the employer's safety rules. With rights, come responsibilities.

[GordonH]

People are so easily willing throw away their rights, it a amazes me.

People have no "rights" to harm their fellow employees because they don't like the employer's safety rules. With rights, come responsibilities.

What harm, all employees need to do is check their temperature if above normal call in sick. While at work wear a mask and wash hands regularly... oh yes don’t touch ones face.
What’s so damn difficult with this.

[Sparki55]

People have no "rights" to harm their fellow employees because they don't like the employer's safety rules. With rights, come responsibilities.

And employers have no rights to force medical procedures on their staff.

Nobody is going out to harm their fellow coworkers. To assume so is insane. Just like nobody driving a car means to hit people in an accidental.

But this is going in circles. Enjoy your weekend.

[the truth]

People have no "rights" to harm their fellow employees because they don't like the employer's safety rules. With rights, come responsibilities.

And employers have no rights to force medical procedures on their staff.

Nobody is going out to harm their fellow coworkers. To assume so is insane. Just like nobody driving a car means to hit people in an accidental.

But this is going in circles. Enjoy your weekend.

[crookedmember]

And employers have no rights to force medical procedures on their staff.

There is no law that prevents an employer from requiring vaccinations as a condition of unemployment. If you don't like it, become self-employed.

[nucksRnum1]

There is no law that prevents an employer from requiring vaccinations as a condition of unemployment. If you don't like it, become self-employed.

Don't say that! The last thing we need is another "business" living off the government.

[LANDM]

[youtube]i[/youtube]

That is not the governor general's duty.

Actually it is read the following:

Constitutional interpretation
The Supreme Court thus performs a unique function. It can be asked by the Governor-in-Council to hear references considering important questions of law. Such referrals may concern the constitutionality or interpretation of federal or provincial legislation, or the division of powers between federal and provincial spheres of government. Any point of law may be referred in this manner.

This is from here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Canada

Your link is for the Supreme Court. Of course, if they were brought such direction, they would deal with it, but that not what you said.
You said that the process would be initiated by the Governor in Council which, in Canada, is the Governor General.
The Governor in General is pretty well a ceremonial title and would not be initiating such action….unless, of course the government of the day directed it. Since they are the one dealing with the mandate in the first place, it is unlikely they would do so.

[Sparki55]

There is no law that prevents an employer from requiring vaccinations as a condition of unemployment. If you don't like it, become self-employed.

Please don't post misinformation. The above is wrong, please read the links below.

https://www.northshorelaw.com/employee- ... -columbia/

https://stlawyers.ca/coronavirus-knowle ... cinations/

[Sparki55]

Don't say that! The last thing we need is another "business" living off the government.

We also don't need people commenting on subjects they don't understand.

[nucksRnum1]

Don't say that! The last thing we need is another "business" living off the government.

We also don't need people commenting on subjects they don't understand.

I see crystal clear and understand the conduits of tax evasion.