Almost two weeks after Government’s promised legal opinion on mandatory vaccines was due, both employers and employees are still in limbo.
The was one of the major talking points at the latest in a series of town hall meetings at the Deighton Griffith Secondary School on Monday.
Audience member Bacari Bascombe questioned why it was still outstanding, while accusing some employers of illegally infringing on their workers’ right to medical privacy.
Bascombe told those present that the administration needed to state its position emphatically on the outstanding matter. and they could only do so with the legal opinion.
“Where does the employer have the legal grounds to ask the medical status of any of their staff members? Mandatory testing of unvaccinated staff members at their own expense is unconstitutional. It does not follow science as both unvaccinated and vaccinated persons can contract and transmit COVID- 19. This is discriminatory. We are asking unvaccinated people to be tested, and not vaccinated. There is something called stigmatizing COVID and unvaccinated people, which is wrong,” he said.
The pro-choice advocate, as he labelled himself, insisted that testing should not be abused by employers or used as a “scare tactic” to compel people to get the jab.
“The legality of it stands that it is illegal right now. The AG has not given his opinion. The PM said that the opinion would come on August 6 or before. That was 10 days ago. . . . The fact that someone owns a business does not mean that they can suddenly make medical choices or decisions for their employers. This is 2021, not 1821. There are no slaves on plantations. The workers have rights and choices and should not be disadvantaged because their choices go against what their employers would prefer,” Bascombe added.
However, Abrahams reiterated that the Government has no policy in relation to mandatory COVID vaccination or testing at this point.
He reminded that the current series of town hall meetings was being used to gather the views of citizens which will be used to help draft any policy.
Abrahams stated: “We are here to try to hear from as wide a cross-section as possible, not just representing the point of view that you would espouse but the other ones who may have concerns about their children, people who may have concerns about health. It is only from hearing from as wide a cross-section as possible can a representative government make policies or take steps that embrace the considerations of the populace generally, as opposed to one particular segment or specified or a particular interested group.
“So, our process, as a responsible government, we heard what the private sector said at the beginning. . . and the Prime Minister indicated ‘let’s talk, let us hear everybody and decide the way forward’. And that’s what we are actually trying to do,” added the Acting AG. (KC)
