It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: kwaka
One guy had two jabs, felt bad, forced to take another to keep his job and now has pericarditis. When to court, was found that the employer has some responsibility.
www.lifesitenews.com... rce=most_recent&utm_campaign=usa
With how this is playing out, it's gonna be a long game. The pressure is building towards those accountable.
Hope more countries go this way.
originally posted by: AnotherJustoneman
My wife worked at a Music Co in Nashville. They insisted all the employees take the jab or not come to work. When my wife refused on ground it violated her personal beliefs they asked her if she ever took the flu shot and she said NO. Well, that made them stop dead in their tracks and they later "retired" her with a better pension than we thought she was going to receive so we would just go away. The company laid of others who were doing all they had to do to come into the office, making it real smart on their part. But they didn't want her back in the building without the Covid jab, bottom line.
originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: kwaka
If an employer liable. Does not a government become liable. Is this what they want.
originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: kwaka
If an employer liable. Does not a government become liable. Is this what they want.
originally posted by: Thefineblackharm
originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: kwaka
If an employer liable. Does not a government become liable. Is this what they want.
Governments legislated these behaviors, but of course they themselves do not want to be liable, just like the drug companies, so it falls on someone other than them, which in this case is the employers. Perfect for the gov't and drug companies.
originally posted by: ScarletDarkness
originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: kwaka
If an employer liable. Does not a government become liable. Is this what they want.
My thoughts too. The government pushed this in the first place , they are as much , if not more liable.
They are trying to shove that responsiblity of to small businesses it seems, hoping these businesses will fail in one go (part of their plans to eliminate the middle and upper middle class of the 99%).
Bill Gates: Rushed marketing of jabs means accepting unknown longer term health risks (Apr. 2020)
FLASHBACK : BILL GATES TELLS VIEWS TO IGNORE LIFE THREATENING SIDE OF EFFECTS OF HIS NEW :CORONAVAX:
originally posted by: Cvastar
a reply to: network dude
"Nobody knows if there will be issues because of this down the road."
That's an awful thought; I'd thought that the further in time we get away from this without complications, the less likely complications would be.
Guess I'm wrong about that.
originally posted by: NorthOS
a reply to: kwaka
I originally found these videos on YouTube but they were deleted due to breaking the terms of service. LOL
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
My sister was staunchly against this jab for the obvious reasons. Her employer forced her to take the shot, and a couple days after she did, they dropped the mandate due to the same reasons. it was too late for her, so now we can only hope the fears and worries were misplaced. But like this OP explains, it's the long game, so is being concerned about negative effects of the jab. Nobody knows if there will be issues because of this down the road.
And before its asked, she has a condition that requires medicine that is hugely expensive and she could not afford to quit and deal with her illness without insurance. I tried to get her to deny the shot and if she got canned for it, sue them later when others did and get her job back with back pay. But I understood why she did what she did.