Login
COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate at Orillia Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital Upheld Despite Nurses’ Termination Grievances
An Ontario arbitrator has ruled that Orillia Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy was reasonable, even though it led to the termination of eight nurses who refused to get vaccinated.
The Ontario Nurses’ Association (ONA) challenged the hospital’s policy, which required all employees to be fully vaccinated by Nov. 30, 2021, or face termination for cause. The policy was implemented in September 2021 following a provincial directive that required healthcare facilities to establish COVID-19 vaccination policies.
Under the hospital’s policy, unvaccinated employees were first placed on unpaid leave starting Oct. 8, 2021. Those who remained unvaccinated by the Nov. 30 deadline were terminated. Of the 16 employees placed on leave, nine were ONA members, and eight were ultimately terminated when they failed to comply with the vaccination requirement.
Trump Announces Plan to Launch Private Health Tracking System With Big Tech Firms
The Trump Administration announced a new initiative on Wednesday designed to allow Americans to share their medical records across a host of apps and programs managed by private tech companies — a move that proponents says will facilitate easier access to those records across the country’s fragmented health care system, but that digital privacy experts fear will risk making patients’ data less secure.
“For decades, America’s health care networks have been overdue for a high-tech upgrade and that’s what we are doing,” President Donald Trump said during an event announcing the initiative on Wednesday afternoon.
Making health records more easily accessible has been a goal of the federal government for decades, with the hope of allowing patients to seamlessly switch between providers. But such efforts have long been dogged by concerns over privacy and the challenges of companies offering competing proprietary records systems.
Federal Court Dismisses Claim Military Vaccine Mandate Led to Spiritual Discrimination
A Federal Court judge has thrown out a lawsuit filed by a former soldier who alleged spiritual discrimination and wrongful dismissal by the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) due to its COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
Liam Jarbeau had spent five years in the army when, in October 2021, the chief of the defence staff introduced the mandatory vaccination policy for all military members.
Jarbeau objected to the mandate, requesting an exemption based on his spiritual beliefs. The soldier’s exemption request was denied, prompting him to eventually file a grievance with the Canadian Forces.
Jarbeau left the military in March 2024, apparently before the grievance process was exhausted. One year later, he filed suit against the federal government, alleging the CAF had breached his Charter rights protecting him from spiritual discrimination.
He also accused the military of constructive dismissal, an illegal labour practice in which an employer fundamentally alters the terms of an employee’s job, such that the worker feels compelled to resign. Jarbeau further contended that undue delays in resolving his grievance denied him due process.
SAG-AFTRA Vaccine Mandate Lawsuit Rejected by Ninth Circuit
The National Law review reported:
In an unpublished but nonetheless significant opinion, the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of a consolidated lawsuit filed by SAG-AFTRA members against their union, finding the claims time-barred and preempted.
In relevant part, the dispute was rooted in allegations that SAG-AFTRA, by negotiating a return-to-work agreement that allowed SAG-AFTRA’s studio and producer bargaining partners to impose COVID-19 vaccine mandates, had violated its duty of fair representation (and related state-law claims) to the plaintiffs, who opposed receiving the COVID-19 vaccine for various reasons.
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California had previously dismissed the plaintiffs’ consolidated claims for two primary reasons. First, it found that the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”) preempted the plaintiffs’ state-law claims — including for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and emotional distress — because the state-law claims all arose out of the union’s purported failure to represent its members fairly, an analysis that required interpreting the agreement in question and, thus, triggered the LMRA.
Goodbye to Privacy in the US — TSA Imposes Facial Scanners at More Airports and Complaints About Mass Surveillance Grow
More than 250 airports in the U.S. are using facial recognition to identify passengers before they fly. The Transportation Security Administration, or TSA, promotes it as a tool that improves security and speeds up boarding… But not everyone is thrilled (as expected), and in fact, more and more travelers are complaining that although it’s supposed to be optional, in practice it feels mandatory and they’re afraid to refuse it.
And here’s where the problem starts, because what happens if you say you don’t want your face scanned? Do they make you wait longer? Do you risk missing your flight?
There is a right to refuse the photo, yes. The problem is that almost no one knows about it, and many who try to exercise that right end up having a pretty unpleasant experience. But that’s why we’re here, to make sure your face doesn’t get scanned if you don’t want it to be.
The truth is, most passengers don’t get any clear notice that they can reject the scan! And those who do often end up in awkward situations… A traveler in Fort Lauderdale said that when he said he didn’t want the photo, the agent snapped back with a “there are already a thousand cameras in the airport” and? officer? I still don’t want you to scan my face!
