No EI for the unvaccinated

[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.

[crookedmember]

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/

Thanks for posting links to lawyers searching for clients.

There is no law that prevents employers from requiring vaccination as a condition of employment.

[Sparki55]

There is no law that prevents employers from requiring vaccination as a condition of employment.

Fine, here is worksafe BC

A PHO order may require select employers in certain sectors to collect vaccination status from their workers, such as for those who work in health care settings. However for other employers, checking vaccination status of their workers is not currently a public health requirement or a WorkSafeBC requirement. Similar to mandatory vaccination policies, employers should seek legal advice when deciding to implement such policies.

https://www.worksafebc.com/en/covid-19/ ... -workplace

A company would have to prove that it it absolutely required unless a PHO exists for that vaccine. Due to the current fascination with Covid and vaccines and elected officials that are going against philosophical logic and reason towards ones own personal health, we might see mandatory vaccinations in some sectors.

The law is reas that the employer must prove they absolutely require access to personal information. Since so e of our society no longer see issue sharing all personal information for some argument for the greater good vs personal medical choice, it will get interesting.

There is no legal precedent here. Lawyers know how to interpret the law. Just like you trust in health science and virology professionals, it would be hypocritical not to trust legal professionals.