Public servant's landmark case challenges discrimination in the era of advanced technology using the interpretation of "genetic characteristics" under the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Another story of trauma and a fight for justice: a public servant placed on LWOP and its implications for all public servants and Canadians. Please share and support.
UPDATE (28 DEC 2024): The interview with Andre is now available:
Following up on the story published last week about a public servant traumatized by the Vaccination Mandate and the Union’s messages aligned with the Employer’s position—so much so that he contemplated ending his life—here’s another account. This time, it’s the story of a public servant who, though equally traumatized, decided to fight back against the injustice done to him and many other Canadians who refused to disclose their medical status, resulting in their removal from work.
Please read his story in the attached Press Release, which he shared with me. Consider supporting and sharing it widely.
When I first met André in Spring 2022 through mutual friends, I was deeply moved by his story. André (a French-speaking public servant), his English-speaking wife, and their lovely two-year-old daughter and just born second daughter. Just months before the vaccine mandates were announced, the family had purchased their first home in the suburbs of Ottawa, taking on a significant mortgage. André, the sole income earner, worked remotely for a federal department, and his salary supported his young, growing family. Life was full of happiness and future plans—until the announcement came, like a bombshell, that André must disclose his medical status or face being placed on Leave Without Pay (LWOP).
For André, the directive was a clear violation of Canadian laws and principles. He decided to do what he believed every law-abiding citizen should do: refuse to comply with what he saw as unlawful instructions and instead fight back.
When André turned to his union for help, however, he quickly realized that the union was not on the side of its members. Instead, it supported the Employer—the very entity he sought to challenge. Undeterred, André resolved to fight on his own, without union backing.
André’s commitment to justice has already yielded significant victories. He succeeded in his appeal to the Social Security Tribunal (SST), where it was determined that there was no misconduct on his part (Read more about this win from “The Canadian Independent” substack below).
His ongoing battle now focuses on ensuring that future generations are protected from the misuse of genetic information in workplaces and beyond.
To learn more theis case and its broader implications, please visit AndreFightsBack.com and read Andre’s article below.
A Preview of What’s Next
In one of my upcoming Substack posts, I plan to share my interview with André. His perseverance and dedication to justice, even in the face of degrading and hateful messages, is inspiring. Sadly, some of these messages came from union representatives, who referred to members like André as employees “who refused to be vaccinated”—a phrase that echoes language used to stigmatize alcoholics as people “who refuse to be” treated for alcoholism.
Even more sadly and concerning, however, is the fact that this same demeaning terminology isn’t limited to André’s Union. I’ve heard exactly the same wording used by representatives of my Union (PIPSC), referring to members who stood up for their fundamental rights—such as bodily autonomy, medical privacy, life security, informed consent, and freedom of religion—leading to their decision not to comply with the Vaccination Mandates.
This suggests that unions across Canada are receiving their communication strategies from a common source. If you think this source is the Privy Council Office (PCO) or the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), which develop “winning communications strategies” related to vaccination mandates for the Government of Canada, you’re only partially correct.
This messaging is clearly transnational, as the same phrasing has been used in other countries that followed the World Health Organization’s (WHO) pandemic guidelines.
So, who is the real source? You’ve probably guessed it—but that’s a topic for another article.