Fraud and Abuse Denied EI Claims for the Unvaccinated

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Should Canadians who lost their jobs over vaccine mandates have been denied Employment Insurance? Certified financial examiner Lex Acker says no, and that $12.9 billion of EI should have been paid out.

Acker presented his findings June 2 in Regina at the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19. His wife, a Nanaimo, BC nurse not named in his testimony, lost her job due to non-compliance with vaccine mandates.

Late in 2021, federal Employment Minister Carla Qualtrough announced that unvaccinated employees would be denied Employment Insurance (EI), but Acker’s wife applied just the same.

According to Acker, a subsequent appeal included a reference to a Supreme Court ruling in which medical coercion was found to equate to assault. An EI agent admitted to Acker that the appeal “got everyone’s attention” at the federal agency but was denied anyway.

Acker applied for all documentation related to the decision and received 1200 pages. Included was a 12-page document entitled BE Memo 2021-10, which directed EI agents on how to administer claims for the unvaccinated.

“The memorandum is not linked to any legislative or regulatory amendments,” the memo explained.

Given the minister’s announcement all such cases would be denied, the memo seems little more than pretense, despite its apparent departure from normal practice.

The memo mandated three requirements to establish a finding of misconduct for an applicant.

“The employer has adopted and communicated a clear mandatory vaccination policy to all affected employees;”
“The employees are aware that the failure to comply with the policy would cause a loss of employment;”
“The application of the policy to the employee is reasonable within the workplace context.”

According to the response to Acker’s wife, which Acker included in a sworn affadavit, the EI agent on the case asked the Vancouver Island Health Authority for the appropriate documentation. The Ei agent noted such documentation was never received, yet denied the claim with the words, “Misconduct proven.”

The EI memo explicitly stated that claimants could still bring Charter arguments forward. Then again, the memo also validated an “employer’s professional expectations,” an apparent veiled reference to vaccination. The memo explained that it was not enough for applicants to say they suffered “discrimination.” Instead, ”the client must be able to demonstrate how they were discriminated against and on what grounds.”

It’s not clear how that would happen if the minister directed all applications to be refused.

Remarkably, the EI agent in Acker’s case acknowledged stated arguments against the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, but said assessing such judgments was beyond the scope of an EI agent, as were “Charter Rights violation arguments.” The agent told Acker to turn to “the Courts, Human Rights Commission, Labour Standards” instead.

The memo said that claimants citing a religious exemption had to show “a clear link” with proof “that the client’s religion is preventing them from being vaccinated” but not use a Bible or Qu’ran.

“[T]he interpretation of sacred texts by the client themselves must not be seen as a particular practice required by their faith,” the memo explained.

The employer also had wide discretion on what medical exemptions to accept.

“In some cases, the employer can refuse to accept a medical certificate because it does not meet the conditions of the employer’s mandatory vaccination policy,” the memo explained.

“However, the client could have another credible medical reason, such as a mental illness or other condition justifying their refusal.”

If the suggestion mental illness could have contributed to vaccine refusals isn’t biased, then what is?

On Substack, Acker estimated a 9.7% termination rate from positions in B.C. Health, based on vacant positions. His analysis of employer pension contributions suggested similar termination rates of 8.6% to 11.5%.

Acker extrapolated these vaccination and employment rates, and the average EI payout of $26,000, to estimate that unvaccinated Canadians forfeited $12.9 billion in EI claims.

A lay perusal of the criminal code by the analyst suggested potential avenues for litigation, such as fraud, breach of trust by a public officer, and disobeying a statute. Tort for misfeasance in public office might also be a civil remedy.

Acker said the EI rejections were due to systemic fraud and abuse, and he has made a good case. Canadians bemoaning the failed government response to the pandemic have yet another reason to demand accountability.

Lee Harding is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Up Next

Too little too late – Former Australian Premier apologizes for implementing COVID vaccine mandates

Don't Miss

Johns Hopkins ordered to pay another $2 million to students not given refunds for COVID lockdown

Todayville

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

Mark Carney Wants You to Forget He Clearly Opposes the Development and Export of Canada’s Natural Resources

2025 Federal Election / 5 hours ago

Canada’s pipeline builders ready to get to work

Business / 7 hours ago

Hudson’s Bay Bid Raises Red Flags Over Foreign Influence

COVID-19

Nearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19 – Scientific Reports Journal

Published on April 22, 2025

Todayville

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

45.3% of “COVID-19 deaths” in Greece had no symptoms — exposing the coordinated PSYOP deployed to maximize fear and enforce mass compliance with draconian control measures.

The study titled “Deaths “due to” COVID-19 and deaths “with” COVID-19 during the Omicron variant surge, among hospitalized patients in seven tertiary-care hospitals, Athens, Greece” was just published in the journal Scientific Reports:

Abstract

In Greek hospitals, all deaths with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test are counted as COVID-19 deaths. Our aim was to investigate whether COVID-19 was the primary cause of death, a contributing cause of death or not-related to death amongst patients who died in hospitals during the Omicron surge and were registered as COVID-19 deaths. Additionally, we aimed to analyze the factors associated with the classification of these deaths. We retrospectively re-viewed all in-hospital deaths, that were reported as COVID-19 deaths, in 7 hospitals, serving Athens, Greece, from January 1, 2022, until August 31, 2022. We retrieved clinical and laboratory data from patient records. Each death reported as COVID-19 death was characterized as: (A) death “due to” COVID-19, or (B) death “with” COVID-19. We reviewed 530 in-hospital deaths, classified as COVID-19 deaths (52.4% males; mean age 81.7 ± 11.1 years). We categorized 290 (54.7%) deaths as attributable or related to COVID-19 and in 240 (45.3%) deaths unrelated to COVID-19. In multivariable analysis The two groups differed significantly in age (83.6 ± 9.8 vs. 79.9 ± 11.8, p = 0.016), immunosuppression history (11% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.027), history of liver disease (1.4% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.047) and the presence of COVID-19 symptoms (p < 0.001). Hospital stay was greater in persons dying from non-COVID-19 related causes. Among 530 in-hospital deaths, registered as COVID-19 deaths, in seven hospitals in Athens during the Omicron wave, 240 (45.28%) were reassessed as not directly attributable to COVID-19. Accuracy in defining the cause of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is of paramount importance for surveillance and intervention purposes.

Key Findings:

Massive Overcounting of COVID-19 Deaths

Out of 530 hospital deaths registered as COVID-19 deaths, only 290 (54.7%) were actually caused by COVID-19.
240 deaths (45.3%) were found to be completely unrelated to COVID-19 — patients died with a positive PCR test, but showed no symptoms, required no COVID-specific treatment, and died of clearly unrelated causes.

Death Certificate Inaccuracy

Of the 204 certificates listing COVID-19 as the direct cause of death, only 132 (64.7%) were confirmed as such after clinical review.
Of the 324 certificates listing COVID-19 as a contributing factor, only 86 (26.5%) were found to be truly related.

Hospital-Acquired Infections Misclassified

Patients infected during hospitalization were significantly more likely to be misclassified as COVID-19 deaths (OR: 2.3, p = 0.001).

Younger Age and Severe Comorbidities Associated with Misclassification

Patients who died “with” COVID-19 were younger, more likely to be immunosuppressed, have end-stage liver disease, or be admitted for other causes.

Symptoms and Treatments Differed Sharply

Patients who died “due to” COVID-19 were more likely to:

Exhibit classic symptoms: hypoxia (44.1%), shortness of breath, fever, and cough
Require oxygen support (93.4% vs. 66.9%) and receive COVID-specific therapies:
- Remdesivir (5-day course: 61.9% vs. 35.2%)
- Dexamethasone (81.7% vs. 40.7%)

Study Strengths

This study went far beyond death certificate coding, implementing a rigorous, multi-source clinical audit:

Full medical chart reviews: Included physician notes, lab data, imaging, and treatment records.
Attending physician interviews: Structured questionnaires captured real-time clinical insights from those who treated the patients.
Dual independent expert assessments: Two experienced infectious disease specialists (each with >2,500 COVID cases) reviewed each case independently for classification accuracy.

This study found that nearly half of all registered COVID-19 deaths during the Omicron wave in Greece were misclassified, with no clinical evidence linking them to COVID-19 as the true cause. Given that similar death coding practices were employed across Western nations, it is reasonable to conclude that COVID-19 death counts were artificially inflated to a comparable degree elsewhere.

This drastic inflation of death counts aligns with what many now understand to be a coordinated psychological operation (PSYOP)—designed to instill fear and maximize compliance with draconian pandemic measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and mass mRNA injection campaigns.

It is this weaponization of fear that has prompted criminal referrals in seven U.S. states, triggering active criminal investigations into top COVID-19 officials for terrorism, murder and racketeering:

BREAKING – The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Apr 18

BREAKING - The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Read full story

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Subscribe to Focal Points

2025 Federal Election

Before the Vote: Ask Who’s Defending Our Health

Published on April 19, 2025

Todayville

From the World Council for Health Canada

The health of Canadians has been compromised by government-mandated COVID-19 injections. The upcoming federal election is an opportunity to demand change and accountability. As you decide which candidate or party is most committed to defending the health of yourself and your family, please consider the following:

The Injections Were Never What They Claimed

The Canadian government successfully mandated the COVID-19 injections by labeling them “safe and effective vaccines.” These products are still being promoted and administered across the country. However, the truth is:

They are not vaccines: Click Here
They are not safe: Click Here
They do not prevent infection or transmission.
Evidence shows they increase the risk of COVID-19 disease and death: Click Here

These Products Contain Multiple Mechanisms of Harm

They cause injury through multiple biological mechanisms: Click Here
They have surpassed all vaccines in recorded history—for all infections, for all of the past thirty years combined—in causing deaths and injuries: Click Here
They are chemically contaminated and adulterated with DNA: Click Here
In Pfizer’s case, fraud is evident: the DNA contamination includes genetic engineering tools derived from the SV40 virus, associated with cancer risks: Click Here