Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations for the Federal Public Service and RCMP
- Thread starter QV
- Start date
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,788
- Points
- 1,210
Not yet, once the deadline arrives...
Speculation or solid info? Ordered vaccines would be a huge deal.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 6,235
- Points
- 1,040
Why? I had to get polio and yellow fever to deploy, and also get an MMR booster. I got the optional Hep A booster as well. Not sure how that is different from requiring a COVID vaccine, when there are numerous possibilities for getting domestically deployed, and continue to be available for foreign taskings (given that most countries will require proof of vaccination to enter).
There are multiple options for vaccines in this case which are fully approved by Health Canada, so totally different than the experimental anthrax vaccine case. Even with the very rare cases of vaccine complications, you're statistically still far more likely to get killed by COVID (by a factor of about 500) and think the incidents of even hospitalization or long COVID symptoms crater for the vaccinated folks, so it's really easy to make the case using facts. If the flu killed 2% of people and left 15-25% with long term symptoms, we'd probably all be ordered to get that vaccine as well.
I suspect there is a lag for an official order just because of how the government rolled out the direction, which seemed to surprise pretty much everyone, and will be followed up with an actual CANFORGEN in the near future. Direction is out though to complete the attestation, and we've been told to expect further clarification on the rest of it (and very specifically to not go any futher than the attestation until specific higher order direction comes down).
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,788
- Points
- 1,210
You don't just mandate something as mandatory, set a deadline, and then do nothing after. There will be consequences for those who refuse to vaccinate. If the CAF did nothing, the CoC would loose a lot of what credibility it has left.
Why? Because of the highly politicized nature of this. Anyone willing to throw away their job would probably eat the charge out of principle, which could really bog down the military justice system.
Right, but you can go disciplinary or administrative. Losing your job is a much more significant consequence than a 126 charge. That can be achieved administratively, which is consistent with the government’s stated approach, and the rest of the federal sphere.
Right, but you can go disciplinary or administrative. Losing your job is a much more significant consequence than a 126 charge. That can be achieved administratively, which is consistent with the government’s stated approach, and the rest of the federal sphere.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,788
- Points
- 1,210
And what do you do after they still do not follow the order after a 126 charge? Vaccination parade with the MPs? Or give them a deadline and charge again? We have little details on the administrative recourse here.
The system seems really reluctant to go down the 126 route. It might be because they have legal advice that it won’t stand up if tested in court. Is it something as simple as being difficult to actually prove that someone refuses a vaccine, as the doctor that offered you the shot wouldn’t be able to testify?
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,134
- Points
- 1,010
I’ve been curious about this also. It’s unlike the CAF to ask soldiers to participate (via MM attestation), it’s usually a “shall do”, or a parade. Granted only a few months ago the DND page for the civ Chief HR Officer stated mandatory vaccination wasn’t supported in Canadian law but that has been stripped since the government announcement, wonder what changed in law?
Threatening livelihoods to compel mandates are a very passive aggressive greasy way to go about it. Just pass a law or in the case of the CAF issue an order and be done with it. If a law or order is not going to fly, then neither does the coercion.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,711
- Points
- 1,160
They eventually organize a committee and then have a vote and create an Order in Council, with details protected by Cabinet privilege, so no one can be directly blamed and everyone can share in the glory.
They simply don’t need to order it. The objective is a vaccinated workforce, so the most effective mechanism is to make it a condition of employment. Anyone who doesn’t satisfy that condition of employment becomes no longer advantageously employable. Purely an administrative thing. It’s not a discipline or conduct matter like not groping your subordinates or not robbing a cab driver, so there’s no need to try to treat it as one. It’s not a misbehaviour to correct through punishment. It’s a change in what the institution requires of its employees.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,788
- Points
- 1,210
I'd argue it isn't a change at all, universality of service has existed for a long time. So have vaccines, you signed the dotted line saying you can be ready to go anywhere. Sometimes that means getting a needle to you don't become a medical burden on a task force. Don't like it? Maybe you should if read the fine print more before joining.
Exactly. There is all sorts of medical information we are already required to submit to our employer (The CAF). Any number of things or lack of things could get us dismissed. Many are essentially conditions to join and stay in.
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 180
It is also at this point an issue of freedom of movement. Being fully vaccinated is already a necessity for travelling, crossing borders without quarantine, etc. So public health rationale aside, the chain of command has an operational basis to track individual vaccination status as a matter of readiness for tasking/deployment/training generally.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,788
- Points
- 1,210
Here's my only question, should it really be the CoC we disclose this to? As being medical should it be disclosed only to CFHS for our medical files which our CoC shouldn't be allowed to know about ?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,758
- Points
- 1,160
So we can't form up a 'leper colony' to use to breach the enemy's defences, I assume?
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 180
It's parsing a bit, but yes, it should be the CoC. The issue is your vaccination status, which impacts your freedom of movement. While the underlying information is medical, the CoC would need to know your status in order to determine if you would be able to meet criteria to cross borders, to avoid quarantine if you are a close contact of a case, to use commercial air/train, etc.
They would also need to know specifically what medical exemptions might apply (e.g. allergy, or temporary exemption due to myocarditis/pericarditis), because those exemptions vary from location to location. Some locations might, or might not, accept an exemption from vaccination in order to travel or avoid quarantine based on these reasons. For example, BC does not permit medical or religious exemptions to its provincial vaccine passport programme: even if you have a genuine medical or religious exemption to vaccination, you cannot access non-essential places where vaccination is required.
The odd part is that, for attestation purposes, past infection + partial series is acceptable as "fully vaccinated", for Quebec residents. This is because Quebec public health guidelines accept past infection + partial series as sufficient. But other jurisdictions don't. It would have been more useful to the CAF to adopt the more common standard for "fully vaccinated" (i.e., complete series), because that way you could be sure that these individuals are actually G2G for travel. Of course the number of CAF members who got infected and only a partial series in Quebec is probably relatively small. But it could come up. This is why a DAG (which would be based on actual medical records, and where "green" = full series; along with the other "mission-essential vaccinations" - there's no COVID-specific DAG item, they're all lumped in together) would still be necessary for actual taskings/deployments.
- Reaction score
- 355
- Points
- 780
Old Yellow books were held in the MIR then handed to Coy Clks for DAG process then to member . Process reversed on Endex. Don't see a problem, the vax is not a condition or disease, therefore not med conf. Or has that changed since I left?
I have to say I would preferred being ordered to get the vaccine than the way they are handling it. It would be more honest.
The military gave me my vaccines so why do I have to attest to my status? Because the CoC is not allowed to know the specifics of my medical status. Then they threaten all sort of career implications and administrative measures for those who don't comply while telling you that you are supposed to take this as pressure from your CoC. What the hell do they think threatening someone's ability to earn a living is if not pressure?
This is just more talking out of both sides of their mouth again. Take a fucking stand rather than trying to have your cake and eat it too. If you can enforce vaccinations as an employment condition, line everyone up and let them choose jab or employment. Just be honest, it would be a welcome change.
The military gave me my vaccines so why do I have to attest to my status? Because the CoC is not allowed to know the specifics of my medical status. Then they threaten all sort of career implications and administrative measures for those who don't comply while telling you that you are supposed to take this as pressure from your CoC. What the hell do they think threatening someone's ability to earn a living is if not pressure?
This is just more talking out of both sides of their mouth again. Take a fucking stand rather than trying to have your cake and eat it too. If you can enforce vaccinations as an employment condition, line everyone up and let them choose jab or employment. Just be honest, it would be a welcome change.
Similar threads
