Nov 27, 2022·edited Nov 27, 2022

YAY! Another win!

But I think, also, that having 'shown or demonstrated a willingness to test' as a reasonable accommodation for a religious exemption as a necessity for strengthening or winning these cases is BOGUS. Here's why...

1) Testing a healthy non-symptomatic person is both ill-advised by the CDC and, in the absence of a clinical evaluation, NOT an indication of infection NOR infectiousness. Therefore, testing is JUST another means of unethical and illegal COERCION. ( ORC 2905.12 )

2) Testing ONLY the un-jabbed, in light of the facts in (1) above, is JUST another means of unethical and illegal DISCRIMINATION. (Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Section 2000e-2)

These are the only reasonable accommodations, in the presence of a religious exemption to an injection mandate, that I can think of (please add to this list):

A) If I begin to feel sick or I am symptomatic, I will take sick leave and/or work remotely.

B) A positive antibody test.

C) Work remotely or during 'off' hours.

NOTE: The known science of natural immunity, to specific coronavirus variants developed after exposure and infection, has been and continues to be well established, long before March of 2020.

Expand full comment

Very well done. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Still unemployed and being told by recruiters that employers are telling them "Don't even send the resume if they aren't vaccinated", even WITH a medical exemption! How is THAT even LEGAL?! An I am a healthcare worker, and the employers are the WORST BULLIES ANYWHERE! SanctiMONIOUS bullies!

Expand full comment

Thanks again for your work on this, it continues to matter into 2023 so much...best from Oregon

Expand full comment

This is for Warner Mendenhall, is there any way you can furnish the name of this claimant or could I provide my attorneys phone number? He is looking for cases to support a lawsuit in Washington State. Thank you.

Expand full comment