That tells me the government is paying them under the table or something

Probably.

Personally, I would not try to get them to sign anything they would see as a legal document. Not as a first move, anyway. It will set off alarm bells, which is not what I would want in that situation (at first).

If it has worked for others, I would like to know. But I suspect they will be finding a way to dance around that.

Instead, I would ask them polite questions in an inquisitive manner, in order to get them to give me the full story. Once I understand their full story, THEN I would come back at them in a manner that lets them know I WILL pursue a lawsuit and possibly criminal charges against them if they insist on pursuing this "policy."

1. Get everything in writing. Prepare for a court battle, and for that everything must be in writing. NOTHING verbal means anything. ONLY what is in writing is relevant. Email is good, as well as written letters, SIGNED.

2. Prepare for the legal battle ahead. Hopefully, it will only be emails back and forth. But this could eventually go to termination, lawsuit, and pursuing criminal charges against them. Either you prepare for that, or you roll over. Your choice.

3. Remember these legal concepts: coersion, fraud, violation of rights under color of law

4. I might send emails to my immediate supervisor, asking what exactly is the policy. When is the vaccination required by? Which vaccination(s) are required or authorized? Which manufacturerer(s)? Just one "shot" or more than one? I want to know SPECIFICALLY which ones are being mandated, and which are not (if any).

5. See how cooperative and "innocent" those questions are in #4? You have to think strategically, but you also have to know what exactly they are saying they want. Even if they have that all laid out in some other format, I would still want it verified by someone in the company. If immediate supervisor can't/won't answer, I would go up the chain of command with my questions. If you are simply asking and they are refusing, then they are acting in bad faith, which boosts your legal case. If they answer, then they are setting the stage for the next round.

6. Then, I could ask why the policy is being implemented in this specific way. What do they expect to accomplish for the company? If they give an answer, it will be based on fraud because the entire thing is based on fraud. But I would want their answers so I could PROVE it in court. Fraud carries with it TRIPLE damages. But you have to prove it in court.

7. Next, I could tell them that I would rather not take these drugs. What are the consequences if I do not take this? I want them to TELL ME IN WRITING that they will terminate my employment. This proves coersion, and that you are now acting under duress.

8. I could then ask them if they are basing their policy on any government directives, federal or state. If yes, then they are acting as an agent of the government, which means acting under color of law. That opens another avenue for legal action.

9. Then, I might "flip flop" and say if I take this one, what benefit do they think it would have for me or the company. I don't know if they will answer this, but if they do, then they are basing their opinion on fraud, again. I also would ask this to find out if they are preferring one over another, and I already know they have no real basis for that. So, another piece of info to use later, if necessary.

Remember: All of the above should be friendly emails back and forth. Do not tell them the law or what you will or won't do. Just clarify what the policy is. Cops don't come right out and tell the suspect that he is being charged. They ask questions, and try to be friendly. They only go for the arrest AFTER they have the probable cause they need. Same concept here.

Phase I: Ask simple questions to get them on the record exactly what their policy is and why (if they don't know why, even worse for them). Phase II: Read them the Riot Act. Phase III: Depends on their response to Phase II.

10. Once I had all this polite email/letter exchange back and forth, I might (and this is ME, it is not for everyone) send a very serious letter, addressed to the CEO of the company (NOT a supervisor -- I would go to the TOP with this one), along with a copy to the Chairman of the Board of Directors, additional copies to ALL of the members of the Board of Directors (I want SOMEBODY on that board shitting his pants, and saying, "We need to re-think this!"), along with a copy to the head of the legal department (General Counsel, or whomever), a copy to the state Attorney General, the local US Attorney (look up who these people were appointed by, and if Obama appointees you might want to skip), a copy to my local members of Congress and state legislature. I want THE WORLD (of "important people" in their eyes) to KNOW what is going on here.

My letter might be along these lines:

• I understand you are implementing a new employee policy that is mandatory for all employees, under threat of termination.
• This policy says that I must be injected with what you are calling a "vaccine."
• It is my understanding that the drugs you are calling "vaccines" are in fact not vaccines, have not been fully tested as vaccines, and that the FDA has not determined their safety or effectiveness, and have merely classified them as "experimental drugs."
• You have not informed me of the risks of these experimental drugs, which I believe you are required to do under federal law, 21 USC 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(II) and 21 USC 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III).
• It is my understanding that there is fraud involved in the information that you are presenting to me with regard to these experimental drugs. In the case of the Pfizer drug, for example, the false claim of "95% effective" has been promulgated in the media, which you seem to have accepted without any investigation -- which I believe is your legal responsibility. Pfizer's trial for that drug actually showed a less than 1% effectiveness in the reduction of mild symptoms (such as headache), and did not address at all the question of effectiveness in the spread of any illness.

[Note: read my post about this so you know the math -- but please do NOT include my post in any of your corresponsdence! Let them find out the truth on their own. https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJPv3MkS/ These drug trials were shams.]

• I feel like you are engaging in coersion to force me to take an unknown, untested, and potentially unsafe experimental drug, under threat of employment termination, when you have no evidence that there is any benefit to anyone, whatsoever, and you have not informed me of all the known damages that some of these drugs may have caused, as cited by the US government's VAERS program, where thousands of people have reported illnesses and even death after taking these drugs.
• Your coersion is a crime under federal law. Furthermore, to the extent you may be acting as an agent of government, you are acting under color of law, and committing felonies under 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242. This includes all individuals who are officers and directors of this corporation, regardless of what might otherwise be considered "limited liability" under state law. When you act under color of law, no state statute can protect you, individually, from liability. Please see the United States Supreme Court decision: “When a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The state has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States” -- Scheuer v. Rhodes 416 US 232 (1974)
• I will also point out that you may be committing fraud by creating a policy that has no factual basis, but only a fraudulent basis, and again the United States Supreme Court has stated: "Fraud vitiates every thing.” US v Throckmorton 98 US 61 (1878)
• It is my position that I will not allow an experimental drug to be injected into my body against my will. Coercing me to do so is both a criminal act and a cause of action against you for monetary damages, and against all parties who may have conspired in this act, individually, whether officers or directors of this corporation, or acting in any other capacity.
• It is also my position that your policy is based on fraud, and not based on any scientific study, which is to say that it is not a legally-enforceable policy.
• It is also my postion that no government employee or agency can dictate any policy that violates the rights of the people to liberty.
• You have not demonstrated that I am in any way a danger to anyone.
• You have not demonstrated that I have any communicable disease or illness.
• You have, therefore, engaged in coersion and fraud to deprive me of my rights, secured by the US Constitution, and I will not allow it.
• If you terminate my employment, I will take appropriate legal action, both under civil law and under criminal law, against all parties who have conspired against me.

That is roughly how I might do it. Such action is not for everyone, but it will need to be done by someone, sooner or later.

Everyone has to assess for themselves the pros and cons of any action they take. And we are all in different stages of life with different roles and responsibilities.

Good luck and Godspeed.