Certification hearings for two high-profile class action lawsuits challenging BC’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates will continue into late 2025 due to court scheduling conflicts. The provincial Supreme Court forced an adjournment before all arguments could be heard, after running out of time during initial court proceedings earlier this spring.The lawsuits, one representing unionized BC public servants and the other representing healthcare workers and paramedics, claim the province's pandemic-era vaccine mandates violated employee rights and caused widespread harm, including job loss and reputational damage..Jason Baldwin, a former public servant with an exemplary record, is the lead plaintiff in the suit against the provincial government. He was fired under the 2021-23 proof-of-vaccination mandate applied to unionized employees.“The 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandate caused a lot of harm,” Baldwin said in a statement.“I’m just one of many public servants who want to hold our employer accountable.”A second lawsuit, led by former healthcare workers Jed Ferguson and Terri Perepolkin, targets mandates issued by Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry, which required COVID-19 vaccination for frontline healthcare and ambulance personnel.“COVID-19 vaccines didn’t prevent illness or transmission and should never have been a condition of employment,” said Perepolkin, who lost her job despite an unblemished career..Justice Emily Burke presided over the initial four-day hearing, held from April 28 to May 1. Plaintiffs’ counsel was unable to finish presenting its case, and both sides have agreed that ten more days of court time are needed. Additional hearing dates are expected to be scheduled in Victoria or Vancouver before the end of 2025.The plaintiffs are represented by Umar Sheikh of Sheikh Law and are supported by two advocacy organizations: the BCPS Employees for Freedom Society (BCPSEF), which represents affected public servants, and the United Health Care Workers of BC Society (UHCWBC), which supports health professionals.BCPSEF, founded to defend medical privacy and bodily autonomy, states on its website that the lawsuit aims to ensure “bodily autonomy and informed consent must be respected in all employment settings.”UHCWBC’s public platform, United Together, warns the mandates “created a dangerous precedent for forced medical procedures as a condition of work.”Both groups have launched fundraising campaigns and public awareness initiatives to support the legal effort.The two suits are at the forefront of a broader debate over pandemic policy, employment law, and civil liberties—questions that will now remain in legal limbo until the hearings resume.
