I’m not a legal expert at all, so I need some help. I have the info post from 20-gauge, but I’m not sure my situation fits, or how if it does.
My husband’s company has been offering $1000 for people to get their experimental gene therapy shots. With a low turnout, they were discussing mandating it. I’m not sure if they got pushback, but they decided NOT to mandate it. However, they have created an interesting loophole. If you don’t volunteer your “vaccination” status, they’ll essentially assume you haven’t gotten the shots and will charge up to $200/month surcharge for insurance premiums. They already charge $35ish for smokers. As a benefit for our location, the company pays all of our insurance premiums.
This doesn’t sit well with me, that they want to take his hard-earned money to get an experimental treatment. We have four kids, and two of them are in private school, so extra money going out the door is not something we’d prefer. But we’re also not getting the shots. He has coworkers that are in agreement they are not getting the shot, but I know that people are more likely to do things against their conscience if it costs them money. We are in agreement that he can spearhead the peaceful noncompliance resistance, and he will make them fire him. We have faith that God will take care of our family, no matter what happens. We just need to know how to deal with his company in the meantime for his coworkers who might be tempted to comply.
TL;DR version - Husband’s company wants employees to pay insurance surcharge for NOT getting the shots and could use legal advice.
Edited to add the company pays our insurance premiums as a benefit for the area we live in.
Yea that sounds SUPER illegal. Threaten legal action.
Sounds like extortion to me.
Not advice but questions that will help identify where the hare is rotting in the pepper:
ETC, ETC,
Going through these questions will show: they do not know shit, have no clue, while trangressing against all kinds of laws on the books. If they perist, insist further on no, and let them make the first move, and sue their asses out of existence for wrongful termination, and especially, think of punative damages. This behavior is grossly culpable and deeply troubling . (Think Nuremberg Code and why it came into existence!)
Also, do not except any changes in employment or employment status.
There exist even more, I belief, on the site of Frontlinedoctors.
Would be better with all the typos and apostrophes corrected. But it's a good start.
Indeed. fat fingers, autocorrect on a mobile.
I'm sure you'll manage.
You cannot garnish someone’s wages for no reason. There are absolutely zero laws in place that allow this to happen. They are blowing smoke out of their ass. Hit them with a lawsuit anyways for extortion and billing abuse. A company is not allowed to charge you to work there... that’s not how this works.
Right on! And where are the studies proving being healthy aka. Injection free, costs more to the company? Even insurers cannot do this. What about the estimate of increased adverse reaction costs per the vaers reporting? And, did they do this regarding any other “vax” like the flu or HIB etc.? Or is it just this experimental jab? Pandemic does not equal tyranny, we have a Bill of Rights and a Constitution.
There are zero studies in place and would take years to get those studies into law.
Band together and fight! Make them fire you. Go to America’s Frontline Doctors website to look for legal help.
I'm not a lawyer, but make them PROVE that you're more of a risk than a vaxxed person. Given that it's the vaxxed that are getting sick, that should be hard, if not impossible, to do.
This is a clever strategy. It doesn't sound like they're breaking any legal codes/statutes here. This isn't wage garnishment, nor breaking HIPAA in any way. It's basically "legal extortion" however.
If you're in a right-to-work state, they can terminate without cause nor explanation.
If there are enough co-workers unwilling to get the experimental poison, you all could band together openly and vocally. There is great strength in numbers. Especially if you/they are vital employees, not easily replaced.
Thank you for your reply. This is exactly where we have arrived also. We do live in a right to work state, Texas. Only 45% of the field employees have gotten the shots, so the majority is able to band together. And they are pretty vital. My husband is pretty annoying to the company in that he asks them questions they hadn’t actually thought about. So he intends to ask on what basis are they making medical recommendations; how is his vaccine status to be used; who is it to be shared with; is the health surcharge a direct representation of costs associated with insurance and how is that amount calculated; and how do they know his vaccination status since he has not elected to provide that.
That looks like a solid list of questions. I'm sure you've seen many posts here that talk about putting the liability back on the employer/doctor if one were to get injured. Lots of forms available that nobody will ever sign. I'm not sure how effective this approach has been however.
You could obviously offer many questions around the validity of the scamdemic. There's an endless list that you could ask to further complicate their efforts.
I think the group resistance is the best play, putting the least amount of pressure on you and your husband asking as rogue, isolated "trouble-makers'.
Good luck!
Charging extra for health insurance policies where smokers are concerned is so very different - smokers are doing something that nobody can argue is bad for their health. I can't see anyone saying, "hey smoking is GOOD for you" to argue that an extra cost to cover the many ailments which come from smoking is not unfair, especially in the modern insurance environment where we all pay for each other's bad habits, essentially. I can be healthy as a horse but I still pay the same premiums as someone with diabetes or some other chronic condition, like COPD...
But this is something very different - there has to be some kind of provision of the HIPAA laws or something surrounding the experimental nature of the EUA authorization the vax currently has. Look into the Nuremberg code and the language surrounding duress in experimental medical procedures. I'm not a lawyer but this seems logical. Maybe find a lawyer in your area and consult with them. Lots of attorneys provide free consultations - I'd get more than just one opinion. There's got to be something preventing employers from demanding your private medical history under the threat of consequences.
And yes, God will take care of your family no matter what happens. Peace be with you! :)
That’s a very specific description so I am pretty sure we have something in common. I believe the scare tactics and testimony are empty threats. I don’t think they will go through with this latest threat. He keeps bringing up New York requiring the vaccine as an example but if that happened here we would be in the midst of a civil war already. Stop letting them get to you.
Feel free to reach out in DM
The actual insurance premium is likely the same, with or without vax. Company is keeping the $200 as punishment to the non vax employee. I would think a law fag would jump on this quickly, but what do I know other than I was an employer that paid for employee insurance prior to my retirement.
https://www.mercer.us/our-thinking/healthcare/smoker-surcharges-its-a-trap.html
I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice. Check out the link above, might be worth looking into this HIPAA related 'alternative' clause...seems employers with group plans have to provide a reasonable alternative to avoid liability in a discrimination suit. This link is in regards to tobacco use surcharges, but it should apply from what I can tell. What the alternative is, and if this is ultimately helpful is another question. (also not sure if the 'group-plan' is pivotal, maybe this doesn't apply if it were individual plans?)
[Note: Mercer seems to be a Healthcare-centered risk assessment firm, with this article seemingly written with Administrators/Policy-makers as it's audience...giving it a touch more credibility in my eyes.]
https://www.mercer.us/our-thinking/healthcare/thinking-about-a-premium-surcharge-for-the-unvaccinated.html
Here's that same author's take on vax, saying basically the same thing...unfortunately we all know the 'alternative standard' is apt to be draconian as well.
It ought to be the reverse. Oh how deep the corruption runs.
They're violating HIPAA laws by requiring anyone to disclose vaccination status. Period. Look up some information on that, and get some people to organize and present management with the fact that they are breaking federal laws to disclose status, and thus could be sued.
But they’re not requiring anyone to disclose it. They’re expecting that people will offer that info willfully in order to receive the money. And they’ll just charge everyone who doesn’t offer the info. Is that still the same?
Sounds like they're going to play stupid games and eventually win stupid prizes.
I'd look at information from thehealthyamerican.org and vivabarneslaw.locals.com. They're both resources trying to fight this mess.
On the other hand, once winter is over, enough of their staff that took the jab will be dead or debilitated that all of this charade will likely collapse...