Free to Fly has filed a class action lawsuit against the Canadian government on behalf of aviation employees harmed because of vaccine mandates. .“The plaintiffs plead the Order tortiously induced the breach of the plaintiffs’ and class members’ contractual employment agreements absent justification,” said Sheikh Law lawyer Umar Sheikh in a court filing. .The applicants for the lawsuit are former Air Canada pilot Greg Hill, former WestJet flight attendant Tanya Lewis, and former Air Canada station attendant Brent Warren. The lawsuit is open to unvaccinated employees who were terminated, coerced into early retirement, or suspended. .The Canadian government required air carriers to establish and implement vaccine mandates in 2021. The order said air carriers must “ensure that while a relevant person is carrying out their duties related to commercial flight operations, no in-person interactions occur between the relevant person and an unvaccinated person who has not been granted an exemption.” .Employees who did not comply with the order were disciplined by being suspended, terminated, or a combination of them. .Thousands of Canadian aviation employees were put on leave without pay in 2021 for not complying with vaccine mandates. .READ MORE: Thousands of Canadian aviation workers lose their jobs.“Yesterday, thousands of pilots, flight attendants, and other Free to Fly aviation professionals were forced into unemployment,” said Free to Fly. .“They have been deemed unwelcome by employers they served safely and faithfully for decades, after insisting on their right to informed consent and health freedom.”.The court filing alleged the employers breached the applicants’ contracts and induced the lawsuit by requesting private medical information, putting people on unpaid leave, and terminating their employment. As the employers had purported to suspend or terminate the employees’ contracts and have refused to pay the sums owing, it said they are in breach of them. .The applicants allege the conduct of the Canadian government is unjustified and unlawful. Due to their relationship with their employers, they have suffered damages. .All Health Canada-approved COVID-19 vaccines have filed product monographs which inform people about the effects of vaccination. The six monographs have not show they have not been proven to stop COVID-19 transmission. .The applicants plead the defendant had no basis to justify the order as a measure to prevent COVID-19 transmission..The court filing went on to say Section 2a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was violated because it provides them with the freedom of conscience to not undergo a medical procedure such as vaccination absent injury to their neighbour. It said vaccine mandates do not prevent COVID-19 transmission and are ineffective and immaterial to ensuring the health and well-being of others. .They plead Section 2d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was violated after the government inserted terms and conditions of employment into their agreements. .The court filing said the order violated Section 7 by infringing on their security of the person, liberty, and residual liberty in mandating a medical procedure and penalizing people with financial and emotional harm. It added the penalty imposed by the non-compliance with it has a coercive, deleterious effect on them. .They pleaded Section 15 could have been violated because they were subject to differential treatment by a burden being imposed upon them, denying them equal treatment in employment. They consider the Canadian government’s conduct not proportional, reasonable, justified, or saved. .Sheikh called Charter damages “a just and appropriate remedy in this case to vindicate rights, deter conduct, and achieve the objective of compensation.”.By requiring applicants to disclose private medical information to employers, they plead a reasonable person would regard this intrusion as offensive and causative of distress, humiliation, or anguish. This disclosure violates common law and statutory privacy rights under the Privacy Act. .The filing concluded by saying the defendants have inflicted mental and emotional distress by engaging in inappropriate behaviour. .“The plaintiffs and class members plead that the conduct of the Defendants as outlined in this Statement of Claim demonstrates a wanton, high-handed, and callous disregard for the interests of the Plaintiffs and Class Members,” said Sheikh. .“This conduct merits an award of aggravated and punitive damages.”.The Canadian government said in September it would be dropping all COVID-19 restrictions at the border effective October. .READ MORE: Federal government ending border vaccine rules, mandatory ArriveCan use on October 1."Based on the data accumulated over the last few weeks, we are announcing the government of Canada will not renew the order in council that expires on September 30," said Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos. .All travellers no longer have to submit information through ArriveCan, provide proof of vaccination, undergo COVID-19 arrival testing, carry out home quarantines, monitor if they are developing symptoms, undergo health checks for travel on air and rail, or wear masks on planes and trains.
