The GoA continues to apply pressure to AHS and APS staff to meet vaccination status deadlines, but in reality, these are meaningless and non-consequential if they are based on unlawful orders and illegal policies. It is clear that deadlines can be moved by the employer. They can also be moved by the employee.
Case in point, it is not a coincidence that on the same day that legal action was filed against AHS that the CEO of AHS extended the vaccine deadline. It is no coincidence that AHS keep saying they “stand by” the vaccine policy more and more as pressure grows from groups such as MyAPSChoice.
YOUR efforts within the MyAPSChoice Group and Heath Professionals United Group is causing the policy to come under scrutiny, as it should.
Notice that no one in the GoA or AHS are stating the policy is legal or voluntary – they merely state they are standing by it, inferring that rightly or wrongly they are stuck with their own creation.
So what is it you should be concerned about regarding deadlines – the answer, NOTHING!
Deadline for identifying an exemption: The concept of an exemption deadline is irrelevant, what you are entitled based on Canada and Alberta Human Rights laws is the ability to disclose to your employer at ANYTIME (next week, next month or next year) that you are claiming protected grounds. Once this has been communicated, based on Supreme Court of Canada rulings, the employer has a duty to accommodate you. The onus is on the employer not the employee. Therefore, there can be NO deadline as to whether you are protected under the Human Rights Act(s).
Deadline for identifying vaccination status: The concept of adhering to a deadline which demands that you consent under duress to the release of private information (contrary to FOIP and the Alberta Privacy Commissioner guidelines) and/or that you obey an unlawful order, and/or that you become party to the commission or omission of a Federal or Provincial law – is without merit and is thereby non-enforceable. You are NOT required to meet a deadline that is illegal.
Deadline to comply with policy or be disciplined: The concept of being subject to harsh discipline (leave of absence without pay / suspension without pay) as the initial measure of corrective action for missing a deadline is ludicrous and contrary to the GoA’s own rules surrounding progressive discipline. Like it or not, the GoA is required to abide by the principles of natural justice and fair adjudication. There are always aggravating and mitigating factors that must be considered by an employer before discipline can be introduced, such as whether the employee believes the policy is constitutionally or statutorily grounded in the law? Failing to comply with the rules of natural justice or ignoring just cause labour principles will open the GoA up to criticism by the Office of the Ombudsman and expose them to civil litigation. You are NOT required to meet a policy adherence deadline that is unfair or unjust. The GoA’s own progressive discipline standards address what must be arbitrated and reasoned BEFORE any discipline: