Connect with us

COVID-19

BC healthcare workers prevented from returning to work despite understaffing

Published

7 minute read

From the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre announces that a 10-day hearing for the constitutional challenge to British Columbia’s Covid vaccination mandates began Monday at the Supreme Court of British Columbia. This challenge draws attention to Public Health Orders that continue to violate the freedom of conscience and religion, right to security, and right to equality of thousands of British Columbian healthcare workers.

On March 16, 2022, the Justice Centre supported a legal challenge to Government of British Columbia Public Health Orders, issued in November 2021, requiring specified groups of healthcare workers to get injected with the Covid vaccine. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of 11 healthcare workers, including front-line staff as well as administrative and management personnel. This court action includes applicants who worked remotely and had no direct contact with patients. These workers refused the Covid vaccine, for which no long-term safety data was available, for reasons of conscience or religion, for medical reasons, or all three. Like thousands of other healthcare workers, they were terminated from their positions and continue to be barred from returning to their work more than two years later.

Over the next two years, the November 2021 Orders were expanded and modified by the BC government, capturing more and more healthcare workers.

  • A June 2022 Order required registrants of various medical colleges to disclose their Covid vaccination status to their respective medical colleges, who would report that information to Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.
  • September 2022 Orders expanded the scope of previous Orders, requiring students applying to post-secondary medical programs, post-secondary staff working in care locations, and post-secondary administrative and managerial staff working in health services facilities to disclose their Covid vaccination status to their institutions, who would report that information to Dr. Henry.
  • April 2023 Orders expanded the scope of previous Orders by requiring staff member construction workers to get injected to work at hospitals and other medical facilities. Previously, constructions workers, whether staff members or working under contract, as well as other outside service providers working on projects within the BC healthcare system, did not need to show proof of vaccination if they followed protocols set out in the Orders. The April 2023 Orders were silent regarding outside service providers, and specifically exempted construction services working under contract, meaning these groups of workers no longer needed to follow personal protective equipment protocols.
  • A June 2023 Order cancelled the June 2022 Order. Registrants of medical colleges would no longer be required to report their vaccination statuses to their colleges, and colleges would no longer be required to report that data to Dr. Henry. However, healthcare workers of any Provincial Health Authority in British Columbia, including workers who did not have in-person contact with patients, were still required to show proof of vaccination before being allowed to work.
  • An October 5, 2023 Order requires any unvaccinated new hires to receive the requisite number of doses of the new XBB.1.5-containing formulation of the Covid vaccine to be allowed to work, making it impossible for many doctors, nurses, administrators, other healthcare workers, and non-healthcare workers to work in BC’s healthcare system.
No provisions for alternative employment or accommodation were made for healthcare workers who chose not to get injected for reasons of conscience or religion, for medical reasons, or for those with natural immunity to Covid.Thousands of healthcare workers and patients lost their jobs as a result of these Orders. According to a March 2022 report, 2,496 British Columbia healthcare workers were terminated for not being vaccinated. Nearly four percent of healthcare workers in Interior Health were terminated; nearly three percent in Northern Health were terminated.

Meanwhile, British Columbia continues to experience a healthcare crisis, according to reports. Emergency rooms in rural communities are closing; wait times are climbing; birthing units in Surrey are suffering from acute shortages – sometimes with fatal consequences. British Columbians are turning to private and even cross-border healthcare options to get treatment.

In addition to pointing out that vaccines have proven ineffective and have caused adverse reactions, lawyers for the Petitioners argue that ordering vaccination as a condition of employment interferes with the right to medical self-determination – protected by Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Further, lawyers point out that the mandates failed to provide opportunities for religious and conscientious objections – protected by Section 2 of the Charter. Further, while healthcare workers were terminated for being unvaccinated, the government was hiring remote-working contractors with no requirement that they be vaccinated, generating a concern about equality – protected by Section 15 of the Charter.

Lawyer Charlene LeBeau stated, “The rights of healthcare workers must not be disregarded, even when the goal is to protect public health. This is especially true in relation to mandating a new medical treatment that has a terrible track record for adverse reactions and, in any event, has proven to be ineffective in stopping infection or transmission.”

Justice Centre President John Carpay remarked, “Understaffing in British Columbia’s healthcare system is literally killing people, based on an ideological decision to punish doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers more than two years after they legitimately exercised their Charter right to bodily autonomy. Science and medicine ought to prevail over ideology.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

2025 Federal Election

Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Mark Carney described the Freedom Convoy as an act of ‘sedition’ and advocated for the government to use its power to crush the non-violent protest movement.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney refused to elaborate on comments he made in 2022 referring to the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy protest as an act of “sedition” and advocating for the government to put an end to the movement.

“Well, look, I haven’t been a politician,” Carney said when a reporter in Windsor, Ontario, where a Freedom Convoy-linked border blockade took place in 2022, asked, “What do you say to Canadians who lost trust in the Liberal government back then and do not have trust in you now?”

“I became a politician a little more than two months ago, two and a half months ago,” he said. “I came in because I thought this country needed big change. We needed big change in the economy.”

Carney’s lack of an answer seems to be in stark contrast to the strong opinion he voiced in a February 7, 2022, column published in the Globe & Mail at the time of the convoy titled, “It’s Time To End The Sedition In Ottawa.”

In that piece, Carney wrote that the Freedom Convoy was a movement of “sedition,” adding, “That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”

Carney went on to claim in the piece that if “left unchecked” by government authorities, the Freedom Convoy would “achieve” its “goal of undermining our democracy.”

Carney even targeted “[a]nyone sending money to the Convoy,” accusing them of “funding sedition.”

Internal emails from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) eventually showed that his definition of sedition were not in conformity with the definition under Canada’s Criminal Code, which explicitly lists the “use of force” as a necessary aspect of sedition.

“The key bit is ‘use of force,’” one RCMP officer noted in the emails. “I’m all about a resolution to this and a forceful one with us victorious but, from the facts on the ground, I don’t know we’re there except in a small number of cases.”

The reality is that the Freedom Convoy was a peaceful event of public protest against COVID mandates, and not one protestor was charged with sedition. However, the Liberal government, then under Justin Trudeau, did take an approach similar to the one advocated for by Carney, invoking the Emergencies Act to clear-out protesters. Since then, a federal judge has ruled that such action was “not justified.”

Despite this, the two most prominent leaders of the Freedom Convoy, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, still face a possible 10-year prison sentence for their role in the non-violent assembly. LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on their trial.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

17-year-old died after taking COVID shot, but Ontario judge denies his family’s liability claim

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

An Ontario judge dismissed a liability claim from a family of a high schooler who died weeks after taking the COVID shot.

According to a published report on March 26 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sandra Antoniani ruled that the Department of Health had no “duty of care” to a Canadian teenager who died after receiving a COVID vaccine.

“The plaintiff’s tragedy is real, but there is no private law duty of care made out,” Antoniani said.

“There is no private law duty of care to individual members of the public injured by government core policy decisions in the handling of health emergencies which impact the general population,” she continued.

In September 2021, 17-year-old Sean Hartman of Beeton, Ontario, passed away just three weeks after receiving a Pfizer-BioNtech COVID shot.

After his death, his family questioned if health officials had warned Canadians “that a possible side effect of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine was death.” The family took this petition to court but has been denied a hearing.

Antoniani alleged that “the defendants’ actions were aimed at mitigating the health impact of a global pandemic on the Canadian public. The defendants deemed that urgent action was necessary.”

“Imposition of a private duty of care would have a negative impact on the ability of the defendants to prioritize the interests of the entire public, with the distraction of fear over the possibility of harm to individual members of the public, and the risk of litigation and unlimited liability,” she ruled.

As LifeSiteNews previously reported, Dan Hartman, Sean’s father, filed a $35.6 million lawsuit against Pfizer after his son’s death.

However, only 103 claims of 1,859 have been approved to date, “where it has been determined by the Medical Review Board that there is a probable link between the injury and the vaccine, and that the injury is serious and permanent.”

Thus far, VISP has paid over $6 million to those injured by COVID injections, with some 2,000 claims remaining to be settled.

According to studies, post-vaccination heart conditions such as myocarditis are well documented in those, especially young males who have received the Pfizer jab.

Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.

Continue Reading

Trending

X