Personally, I would maintain a communication between them and me. That might be my boss, HR, CEO, or whomever. Email is likely best, because it can later be verfied if needed (otherwise, it would have to be certified mail, which leaves a bad impression from their perspective).

I would want to make sure I put them into a box, and when they eventually refuse to respond to something, that shows bad faith. All of this, of course, for future lawsuit, if needed.

If they are relying on EO, which one(s)? EO's are ONLY directives to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. They have no other authority. So, an international company has NO legal ability to rely on an EO as any sort of justification.

If they rely on OSHA, and they are not involved in shipping or the other few areas of federal government contracts, then that is also NOT any legal authority for them.

Even if they were, they would be acting as an agent of government, and then need to be following the law.

If they were issuing a medical procedure mandate, against my will, as a condition of employment, I would want to set them up for later lawsuit of fraud, if it came to that (keeping the job with no mandate would of course be ideal).

So, my email(s) would include such things as:

• What is the basis for this mandate? -- legal basis
• What does the company expect to accomplish? -- they will say they want to protect employees, but that is not possible with these drugs, since there is no evidence they protect anyone from anything
• Which drugs do they recommend? -- if they give medical advice without a license, that is a violation of law
• Why those drugs? -- get them to say the ones they think are acceptable, knowing that they are all under EUA, which makes them experimental and not approved
• If they did NOT have this mandate, they would NOT have any legal liability if anyone at their company got Covid -- has anyone got Covid? Did they sue the company? No. Could they sue the company? No, because nobody could prove they got it at work.
• I would want to make sure I owned at least one share of stock in the company, which means I could file suit as a stockholder, too, since they are jeopardizing the financial well-being of the company by issuing a mandate when not issuing it would not expose them to liability but issuing it does
• Is any government agency or any other party paying them to issue this mandate? -- are they being paid off to do it?
• On what scientific, medical basis do they claim that this mandate will benefit the company? -- there is NO research that shows either efficacy or safety
• Since I have a right under federal law to be fully informed of any experimental drug, I would demand to know all the negative health issues that others have suffered after taking these drugs, including death -- point to VAERS
• If they require a PCR test, ask to get a copy of the insert, which has been reported to state "Not for use in diagnosis" -- and then ask them why they are demanding this be used for a purpose for which the manufacturer says it must not be used

IOW, I would get these sorts of things in emails to establish a record of the communication. Asking questions, while not refusing, puts you in the best legal position you can. If you can circulate these to executives and directors, too, you might get someone to put the brakes on.

Being an international company, probably run by woke graduates of universities that have indoctrinated them, it is a tough road. But I think it is best to establish a record that shows that you were honestly trying to get information to clarify what they wanted you to do so you could make an informed decision, and they were obfuscating and acting in bad faith.

It is coercion to use threats and intimidation to do something they do not want to do, and are not legally obligated to do.

The EO's and OSHA documents show that they do NOT have legal authority, and it is therefore coercion and also based on fraud, since there is NO science behind any of this.

Also, get a book on how to handle a lawsuit. Even if you don't do it, at least you will have some idea of what an attorney should do.

Good luck.

P.S.

You would think the lawyers at these corporations know this. And I think they do. Their first priority is to defend corporate interests.

That's why I would throw out there that the company has NO liability if they do NOT implement this mandate (unless they are getting paid off and reimbursed if they do it anyway, which is possible). I would also through out that coercion is a felony and a tort, which means their corporate veil will not protect them from personal liability or criminal action. Of course, now we are getting down and dirty, so that would be the last straw type of language to use, not the friendly start of communication. But this type of thing might be the only thing that will get them to back off -- if they think they are facing personal liability and make them question if they really know they are opening up major legal problems.

Personally, I would maintain a communication between them and me. That might be my boss, HR, CEO, or whomever. Email is likely best, because it can later be verfied if needed (otherwise, it would have to be certified mail, which leaves a bad impression from their perspective).

I would want to make sure I put them into a box, and when they eventually refuse to respond to something, that shows bad faith. All of this, of course, for future lawsuit, if needed.

If they are relying on EO, which one(s)? EO's are ONLY directives to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. They have no other authority. So, an international company has NO legal ability to rely on an EO as any sort of justification.

If they rely on OSHA, and they are not involved in shipping or the other few areas of federal government contracts, then that is also NOT any legal authority for them.

Even if they were, they would be acting as an agent of government, and then need to be following the law.

If they were issuing a medical procedure mandate, against my will, as a condition of employment, I would want to set them up for later lawsuit of fraud, if it came to that (keeping the job with no mandate would of course be ideal).

So, my email(s) would include such things as:

• What is the basis for this mandate? -- legal basis
• What does the company expect to accomplish? -- they will say they want to protect employees, but that is not possible with these drugs, since there is no evidence they protect anyone from anything
• Which drugs do they recommend? -- if they give medical advice without a license, that is a violation of law
• Why those drugs? -- get them to say the ones they think are acceptable, knowing that they are all under EUA, which makes them experimental and not approved
• If they did NOT have this mandate, they would NOT have any legal liability if anyone at their company got Covid -- has anyone got Covid? Did they sue the company? No. Could they sue the company? No, because nobody could prove they got it at work.
• I would want to make sure I owned at least one share of stock in the company, which means I could file suit as a stockholder, too, since they are jeopardizing the financial well-being of the company by issuing a mandate when not issuing it would not expose them to liability but issuing it does
• Is any government agency or any other party paying them to issue this mandate? -- are they being paid off to do it?
• On what scientific, medical basis do they claim that this mandate will benefit the company? -- there is NO research that shows either efficacy or safety
• Since I have a right under federal law to be fully informed of any experimental drug, I would demand to know all the negative health issues that others have suffered after taking these drugs, including death -- point to VAERS
• If they require a PCR test, ask to get a copy of the insert, which has been reported to state "Not for use in diagnosis" -- and then ask them why they are demanding this be used for a purpose for which the manufacturer says it must not be used

IOW, I would get these sorts of things in emails to establish a record of the communication. Asking questions, while not refusing, puts you in the best legal position you can. If you can circulate these to executives and directors, too, you might get someone to put the brakes on.

Being an international company, probably run by woke graduates of universities that have indoctrinated them, it is a tough road. But I think it is best to establish a record that shows that you were honestly trying to get information to clarify what they wanted you to do so you could make an informed decision, and they were obfuscating and acting in bad faith.

It is coercion to use threats and intimidation to do something they do not want to do, and are not legally obligated to do.

The EO's and OSHA documents show that they do NOT have legal authority, and it is therefore coercion and also based on fraud, since there is NO science behind any of this.

Also, get a book on how to handle a lawsuit. Even if you don't do it, at least you will have some idea of what an attorney should do.

Good luck.