Don't expect EI if you lose your job for not being vaccinated, minister says
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ei-vax-status-1.6220287
Don't expect EI if you lose your job for not being vaccinated, minister says
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ei-vax-status-1.6220287
Her biggest problem is that it is against the constitution. And union rules. A change in conditions of employment like that might be made to stick to new hires, but not to existing employees.
So…those that have paid into UIC (or EI or EIEIO or whatever it’s called now, for decades), & a COVID 19 shot was NOT a prerequisite for employment when they started their current job years & years ago, if they lose their job over this COVID 19 shot…won’t be able to collect on their insurance they’ve paid into…just really sounds so very wrong.
Personally I’m fully vaccinated but that’s my personal choice, & that doesn’t change the fact that denying these people Employment (or Unemployment?) insurance just seems so very wrong. If they’re going to refuse them over something like this, then every penny of EI/UIC contributions should be refunded immediately & in full to these people if they’re denied the insurance they’ve paid into for decades potentially.
Justin Trudeau runs on divisive politics, (East vs West, Rural vs Urban, Quebec vs ROC, etc…) and this is just another example (Vaccinated vs Unvaccinated) of his divisive bullshit. This just doesn’t surprise me coming from his camp.
Personally I’m fully vaccinated but that’s my personal choice, & that doesn’t change the fact that denying these people Employment (or Unemployment?) insurance just seems so very wrong. If they’re going to refuse them over something like this, then every penny of EI/UIC contributions should be refunded immediately & in full to these people if they’re denied the insurance they’ve paid into for decades potentially.
Justin Trudeau runs on divisive politics, (East vs West, Rural vs Urban, Quebec vs ROC, etc…) and this is just another example (Vaccinated vs Unvaccinated) of his divisive bullshit. This just doesn’t surprise me coming from his camp.
Getting (or not getting) a COVID 19 vaccination is a personal medical decision. I chose to get vaccinated, others have decided not to.
As a mental exercise let’s take this in a slightly different direction with a different personal medical decision.
“A woman gets pregnant, and her employer (& you can take either position on this) States that if she gets an abortion (or doesn’t get an abortion, whatever), she will be laid off or let go and the current government of the day decides that she will not get EI unless she goes with her employer’s decision with respect to her personal medical choices.”
Or “A man gets prostate cancer. The employer dictates that he has to (or that he can’t) receive chemotherapy or he will be laid off or fired or let go….& based upon his decision his personal medical choice if it goes against the employers wishes (& that of the current government) then he’ll be refused the insurance that he’s paid into for potentially decades.”
How would this be perceived by the average person out in the public or the media, etc…? Is it really very different than what the current Trudeau government and his current Cabinet Finger-puppet in the above video is doing?
As a mental exercise let’s take this in a slightly different direction with a different personal medical decision.
“A woman gets pregnant, and her employer (& you can take either position on this) States that if she gets an abortion (or doesn’t get an abortion, whatever), she will be laid off or let go and the current government of the day decides that she will not get EI unless she goes with her employer’s decision with respect to her personal medical choices.”
Or “A man gets prostate cancer. The employer dictates that he has to (or that he can’t) receive chemotherapy or he will be laid off or fired or let go….& based upon his decision his personal medical choice if it goes against the employers wishes (& that of the current government) then he’ll be refused the insurance that he’s paid into for potentially decades.”
How would this be perceived by the average person out in the public or the media, etc…? Is it really very different than what the current Trudeau government and his current Cabinet Finger-puppet in the above video is doing?
Well Ron, you can't equate "abortion" with the reluctance to get the vaccine because one allows women to make the decision and the other doesn't. "It's my body and it's my decision" only applies to the former and not the latter.
Depends on the contract that was issued and signed at the time of employment, yes everyone signs a contract as terms of employment union, nonunion, casual, or 3rd party contractor. Even EI has a contract or conditions of benefits, I smell lawsuits coming from many angles on this but we know they will drop all mandates by the time it is heard in court.
OK, how about the man with prostrate cancer scenario then? Pick either forced decision by the employer (has to has not to, etc…) regarding treatment? It’s currently not a politically decisive wedge issue for the Trudeau Gov’t to beat a dead horse with.
But have workplace conditions changed? Generally workplace conditions end at the gate, except for a few like pilots. Covid really has nothing to do with the workplace, but government policy. Many businesses are terrified of being shut down by the covid cops. or having even more unwieldy laws forced on them.
Ontario court issues interim injunction against UHN vaccine mandate
Author of the article:Anthony Furey
Publishing date:
Oct 24, 2021 • 12 hours ago • 2 minute read
In the article
The UHN covers Toronto General, Toronto Western and Princess Margaret Hospitals, among other facilities.
“The harm raised by the applicants is potentially serious and cannot be undone,” wrote Ontario Superior Court Justice Sean Dunphy, in a decision issued Friday. “It is alleged that some or all of them may be compelled to take the vaccine against their will because they cannot in their personal and family circumstances take the risk of being left destitute by the policy they are seeking to challenge.”
But this isn't employers adapting to changing conditions, it's govt telling them what they HAVE to do, or else! One is by choice, the other is by force. Similar to passports. If I don't plan on leaving the country to go vacation elsewhere and shit, I don't need to have a passport and the govt isn't going to force one on me. But, if I want to travel anywhere in Canada as a Canadian citizen, I now require a "passport" per govt command. A practice that was roundly condemned at the Nuremberg Trials and for pretty obvious reasons.
But workplace conditions have changed, and employers have a responsibility to to do their best to ensure workplace safety. The un-vaxxed present a higher risk to themselves and others - fact. It's a joke how people are playing this as an infringement on their rights when if you look at it from another perspective they are forcing their version of morality on the majority who do not share their views. They are putting their personal liberty above the safety of society at large. I can't see it as anything other than selfish and irresponsible.
I would suspect that it would be illegal for the company to force (or not) him to decide. under current Employment Standards. But if the Leftists (Globalists) continue to attain power, it wouldn't surprise me to see that this change.
That is why we need to fight this Marxist B.S - hard!!
Let's look at it in a different angle again what are these corporations going to gain by capitulating to these Illegal mandates that are essentially going to hit their bottom line by loss of production and PR?
Except the so called vaccine neither stops one from contacting or spreading the disease . So who is being protected ? On top the protection given apparently wears off with time , is that time considered in your valid passport ?
I think you have that backwards. For the most part companies are just toeing the government line to try and prevent being forced out of business.
And yet the Fed routinely profits from the selfish and irresponsible behavior of people. See why it's kind'a hard to take those kind of appeal to the emotional arguments seriously?
I try not to let fringe arguments get in the way of facts. The question of whether or not vaccine mandates lead to a safer workplace is a no brainer. That the pandemic has become driven by unvaccinated people is evident in the fact that the vast majority of hopsitalizations are among unvaccinated people. The question with EI eligibility hinges on whether or not refusing to comply with workplace health & safety regs is tantamount to quitting. While there may be some issue if people have a legitimate medical reason not to vaccinate, fear of a serious adverse reaction is not among those reasons as the chances of that occurring are so remote. For most of the vaccine resistant it has become a political battle, "me" is more important than "we", and that's not an easy fight to win.
No it is being driven by not being able to keep it away from institutional care . The majority of cases and deaths are still elderly obese and those with pre existing morbidities . The general population is not really being affected .