Why did it have to go this far?

No political representation for a significant proportion of the population gave birth to a large movement initiated by truckers that was referred to as a fringe minority by the highest office. But nevertheless sufficient to have him go in hiding?

It was merely a refusal to hear their pleas, to be proactive towards a resolution to this still ongoing situation. Unvaccinated employees are still losing their livelihoods and travel by plane and train is still prohibited to unvaccinated Canadians.

Regarding the vaccine mandate, PSAC announced they filed a policy grievances against federal vaccination policy on March 23rd 2022. They claimed the following:

Throughout the pandemic, we have continued to support members who have had their human rights or workplace rights violated because of their vaccination status.

Lies seem common from yellow unions, unless they consider unvaccinated members as subhuman? If PSAC supported members as it claims to have, Feds For Freedom would not have been created. Unions forced their members to seek external counsel from which stemmed already many lawsuits already. And they claim to have been supportive?

In the past unions have played a role of protecting David from Goliath, having by extension a positive impact on general quality of life conditions beyond their membership. But with the rise of cost of life in the past decades, beyond what any union will be able to negotiate for their members, their playing politics have costed all of us dearly.

Unions have been pretending to care for members for long enough without walking the talk. They are protecting their selfish rent-seeking interests by refusal of adaptation of work organization to the technological revolution. Forcing their members to become low market value employees directly caused by a subpar work experience the union style of work organization is responsible for.

All public servants are in on that "secret", but most are quiet because it benefits them, accountability is non-existent and expectations to adapt to new technology are low. A feeling of being overpaid compared to their private sector counterparts have long numbed employees desire to ask for more from their unions, until they were thrown in front of the bus.

Unvaccinated employees have been sent letters advising them to either get vaccinated, that they already did not want to, or be placed on administrative leave without pay, losing their ability to earn a living as a consequence for not doing something they object to. It is intimidation according to the letter of the law:

Section 243(1)b) of the Criminal Code of Canada reads as follow:

423 (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who, wrongfully and without lawful authority, for the purpose of compelling another person to abstain from doing anything that he or she has a lawful right to do, or to do anything that he or she has a lawful right to abstain from doing,

(b) intimidates or attempts to intimidate that person or a relative of that person by threats that, in Canada or elsewhere, violence or other injury will be done to or punishment inflicted on him or her or a relative of his or hers, or that the property of any of them will be damaged;

It is still unclear as to what enables this without criminal charges being pressed. It seems unlikely that the recipient of such a letter who would respond with a punch to the face to the emitter of such threats would not be indicted. But then what enables the signatories of those letters to get off scot free? Are we lead by mob rule? No law have ben changed. What use do have laws, as guardrails, if they have no force because the wind is blowing in a different direction?

Certainly, there are employees who are a threat to due process and cheerleaders of mob rule. This would have never got this far otherwise.

Many employees claimed to be vaccinated when attesting of their status, but there is no auditing of those attestations, it is a can of worms. The possibility of employees misrepresenting their status, presumably in an attempt to avoid confrontation, is plausible. An audit, likely occurring at a slow enough pace, like a steamroller, would crush any employee who misrepresented their status while preventing the mass reaction that a quick and general audit would.

Meanwhile, vaccinated employees' knowingly see their "choices" instrumentalized to justify throwing unvaccinated employees out like garbage and stay arms crossed; they have skin in the game.

Who would have thought that it is possible to harass employees by staying arms crossed? It is not new, oftentimes workplace reprehensible behavior is not unnoticed, but remains undisclosed; that makes those privy to it accomplices.

The workplace is just a subset of society, despite the only way to avoid conflict in a civilized society is to live and let live, we are expected to work with intolerant people like this.

But they cannot.

More than one in four Canadians support jail time for the unvaccinated, poll finds.

Meanwhile there is a focus on torts from the past for which none of the living is responsible, not that those were not atrocious, but there are ongoing torts happening that can be actioned in the immediate. Even animal rights activists seem to garner more sympathy than human beings pleading for informed consent.

But what to expect of those who have been ostracized, impeached from participating in society, as far as threatened with forced injection and additional taxes for Quebec residents? Would it not be expected that these individuals be warry of their counterparts, after losing their livelihood due to the intolerance of their peers that enabled such policies implicitly or explicitly?

Perhaps it is more pressing to address ongoing torts that are affecting living human beings? Or are we going to deplore how inhumane it was 10 years from now? Maybe make a national day for it?