Toyota Employees Win Right to Decline Medical Treatment – Weekly Antigen Testing No Longer Mandatory

Source unknown | Telegram

7,000 employees in Toyota plants in Cambridge and Woodstock Ontario have PUSHED BACK on their employer, who wanted to begin mandatory weekly Antigen testing of all employees effective April 5, 2021.

Here’s what a select group of Toyota employees did – they:

• reached out to Vaccine Choice Canada for a risk assessment for PPE mask wearing with risks vs benefits assessment

• reached out to Stand Up Canada for legal information on their rights to refuse medical treatment (VCC pointed them our way)

• compiled their own legal package and shared it with fellow employees to give them the confidence to refuse this medical treatment

• showed their HR department a video from the provincial government, exposing their test as being useless as per the government’s own health minister (July 2020, Public Health Physician Dr. Yaffe explains the “no-test order for Ontario teachers”. She admits to a 50% false-positive rate for covid tests. Here is the short video clip HERE)

• posed a lot of questions to their HR department about exposure rate of ethylene oxide (substance found on the nasal swab used for testing); in particular what kind of exposure could an employee expect to receive on a weekly basis?; what would happen if a nurse punctures an employee’s nose or the employee doesn’t know they have an allergy to this substance?; what if this employee gets a sinus infection from trapped contaminants in their mask around the shop from touching their mask 40 times every 15 minutes?; and what would happen if an employee were to get bacterial pneumonia?

• indicated that the masks aren’t designed for this specific environment and that NO risk assessment had been done on contaminants trapped in these masks

• indicated that if employees wear masks all day, that they can’t expel this toxic substance out of the nose

• pointed out that under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the employer is responsible for the amount of exposure to ethylene oxide that is airborne – not shoved deep into the nose of employees on a weekly basis

• suggested that they test only the sick, to limit the exposure to ethylene oxide

• advised that their physicians wanted to know the rate of exposure of this toxic substance

• stated that the employer would be deteriorating the trust relationship between employer and employee for a test that has a 55% false positive result

• indicated that the threat of sending employees home without pay (Infectious Disease Leave) if they refuse to be tested, would be a drastic measure only to be assured of eroding the trust of employees

• pointed out that they would be putting healthy people with no symptoms at risk of being unhealthy

• pointed out the glaring fact that this measure could cost the employer billions of dollars in legal fees if words gets out about health risk associated with these tests

• and ended with a single question, “I want to know who is going to be liable?”

About this entry