I teach entirely online for a community college in California. Despite being socially distanced from Los Angeles by over 2,000 miles at my place in NH, my college’s Board of Trustees has mandated I take an mRNA shot.
I’m not a lawyer – but it’s easy to find ways to confound these dumb tyrants. Here’s how I’m fighting the Board’s vaccine rule.
First, I told my employer there’s no way I’m taking an experimental vaccine. Most HR departments come back with, “Pfizer’s Comirnaty injection has been approved by the FDA (in August) so it’s no longer experimental!”
But wait – most HR departments may not know Pfizer and other vaccine manufacturers continue to circulate their Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) supplies of mRNA vaccines along with limited supplies of the Comirnaty vaccine.
We want to thank Pam Brown, Ph.D. for this Op-Ed. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you would like us to consider, please submit it to Editor@GraniteGrok.com.
A Newsweek article published on 10/7/21 reveals this fact, and the article further notes
“The FDA states that the formulation for the EUA version of the Pfizer shot and the approved version is the same, although the two are legally distinct.”
The word “legally” is important – as any HR administrator, HHS official or elected representative knows.
Continued circulation of EUA vaccines means drug manufacturers continue to be shielded from liability should harms arise from use of these experimental shots.
At the same time, a growing list of adverse side effects is being catalogued and more may emerge over the next 5 to 10 years – the normal time frame for testing the safety and effectiveness of drugs.
I asked the HR department why the college District, my employer, thinks it has the authority to require staff (and our students!) to take injections which include EUA versions in wide circulation. Just this week, the college announced a mobile van will be on campus:
“to help you get your Covid19 vaccination”
– and the announcement explicitly indicates it will distribute EUA versions.
Our HR director tried to argue during a Zoom that “vaccine mandates are lawful” – and she cited TB tests and vaccines. Sure – but TB vaccines are FDA approved. EUA supplies of mRNA shots are not.
I asked if the Board will accept full liability for any long-term harms the EUA vaccines might cause our students and our employees.
Pfizer, Moderna and J&J certainly won’t.
If the Board confirms it will do so (no word yet) – I’m sure taxpayers will be thrilled.
One statement HR issued regarding “adverse side effects” provided neither clarity nor reassurance. It simply stated:
“It has not been determined if any possible side effects from mandated vaccinations will be covered by Workers’ Compensation.”
Wow. Nice.
I asked the Board to pause its mandate of comingled vaccine supplies of unknown liability and clarify legal responsibility for adverse effects. I am still awaiting a response and tomorrow is the last day to get a shot – or suffer the consequences.
With pharmaceutical producers indemnified against potential lawsuits for EUA injections – both in the short run and over the long run – an informal response such as, “we’re confident…” will not be adequate.
EUA supplies have been taken – and continue to be distributed to our students and our staff. People think they are “all the same.” They are not legally the same.
Refusing the jab will likely lead to my job termination, according to HR.
Will other “disciplinary measures” be forthcoming – denial of health insurance, or pension money?
This is California; anything’s possible.
I did ask HR. She responded: “All those pieces are not finalized.”
Can you believe this? It’s like Obamacare!
How can employees and students make reasonable decisions with respect to the Board mandates without knowing all the consequences?
Hey – where are those self-described heroes of workers – the college’s labor unions? 13 of them – from Teamsters to AFT. Not a peep out of them. And we all know why. Mail in ballots. No need to “circle back” on that.
My hesitancy (and that of other employees) has been publicly termed “unprofessional” or “insubordinate” by the HR office.
Nope. Employees with concerns about unknown liability and disciplinary consequences have legitimate questions. We simply want information – and accountability.
Will legislatures in CA and in other states draft laws to assign liability for experimental-medication mandates firmly with the employer – as Florida’s Governor DeSantis is pursuing this month?
Let’s Go Brandon! ? .. .? … ???
