Synopsis of a letter drafted by Herb Dunton Barrister & Solicitor addressed to BC General Employees Union President Stephanie Smith and Executive Committee
“I am writing to you on behalf of my clients, a large and growing group of healthcare support workers who are members of your union. My clients have retained my services to assist them in understanding the law and in presenting their requests to you for BCGEU’s support and representation against the “vaccine”1 mandate of a ruthless employer, the BC Government and its agencies and contractors.”
Again Mr. Dunton repeats that “My clients are not coming to BCGEU as adversaries, nor with the threat of litigation. Rather, they are hopeful that this discussion will result in a renewed solidarity and shared sense of purpose among the BCGEU membership.”
Mr. Dunton refers to the BC General Employees Union Collective Agreement;
Collective Agreement
I acknowledge that in Article 22.5(b) of the BCGEU collective agreement the union has agreed that its members “may be required to take […] vaccination, inoculation and other immunization […] unless the employee’s physician has advised in writing that such a procedure may have an adverse effect on the employee’s health.” However, Article 22.5(b) had a context, definition, and necessary implications that are not subject to re-interpretation by the employer to suit its shifting purposes, as follows:
The dictionary definition of “vaccine” has been changed in Covid-19 times, to include mRNA medicines. In this letter, the word “vaccine” and derivatives are sometimes used in their original definition and sometimes in their revised definition, which will be apparent from context of use.
Additionally, Mr. Dunton outlines his counterargument to this Collective agreement by pointing out: a. Incomplete trials b. Vaccine death and injury c. Doctor’s Note
The novel, transitory, and untested Orders of the Provincial Health Officer requiring vaccination or constructive dismissal are illegal. These Orders are ultimately bound to fail in the courts under the accumulating medical evidence.
Accordingly, my clients request that BCGEU undertake a reassessment of its current ‘pandemic’ policy, and recognize the irreconcilable conflict between:
- on one hand, its commitment to the civil rights and liberties of its members, and its duty to represent and defend its members against any illegal behaviour of the employer; and
- on the other hand, its acquiescence to the vaccine mandate, in deference to the Provincial Health Officer.
