'No Jab, No Job' Mandates in NZ: what the 'authorities' have to say.
Follow-up to a previous post about this topic
There has been silence from the various entities tasked with protecting our rights and freedoms from the ongoing discrimination against New Zealanders. Thousands of people are still excluded from the workplace, or even from applying for a job, three years on from the covid era mandates. Why? What is being done to correct this prejudice? Who is benefitting from this injustice?
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about the ongoing covid era jab mandates in place around New Zealand today with some examples:
Three years on: workplace discrimination continues against thousands of New Zealanders
NB This post is slightly too long for an email - please click on the title to read the whole article - this is important because we need to raise awareness of a subject censored by legacy media. Thank you for your support!
Comments on the story indicate the situation is worse than I thoughts and just as bad in Australia. On the basis this discrimination is blatant, and contrary to the NZ Bill of Rights Act, the Employment Relations Act, the Health and Safety at Work Act and numerous other common sense protections in place since the beginning of ‘civilised’ society, I asked Employment NZ the entity set up to assist workplace issues, to comment on the article.
I spoke to what seemed to be a robot. She repeated over and again a dismissive phrase that they were a ‘charity’ (yeah, nah) and it was up to employers what they wanted to advertise, not the Government. So then I asked the NZ Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), for a comment, this is the response I got from Pele Walker, Director, Dispute Resolution:
While MBIE is the administering agency of the Employment Relations Act 2000, the protections against discrimination in this Act apply exclusively to employees. These protections extend to employees who have accepted an offer of employment and are yet to commence work. However, the protections in this legislation do not extend to individuals in the pre-employment process.
Concerns of discrimination in the pre-employment process are dealt with under the Human Rights Act 1993. As such, your query is likely best directed to the Human Rights Commission and the Human Rights Review Tribunal, who have jurisdiction concerning the Human Rights Act 1993.
Now you should note that Pele Walker received the MNZM (Order of Merit, our country’s highest honour), for services to the Pacific community in 2015. She was appointed to MBIE after a 14 year stint (including 2 years as CEO) at, you guessed it, the NZ Human Rights Commission (HRC). How convenient for her to push the problem onto her past colleagues’ desks?
So let’s go see what the NZ Human Rights Commission, says about this repeated discrimination. But OMG just look at the front page of their website….!
Page down and we find that this is published in their Q&A. (It looks like it was written in 2021?):
So this is great, we’ve gone from Employment NZ, to MBIE, to HRC to Worksafe …still without an answer to our question. What does a health and safety risk assessment look like, from the Human Rights Commission’s perspective? Let’s have a look at WorksafeNZ (regulator of H&S, the equivalent of the HSE in the UK) for guidance:
For most workplaces, COVID-19 is not a risk arising from their work that needs to be managed from a health and safety perspective. It is now like other community-based infectious illnesses that can impact workers and their work.
However, if you are one of the few workplaces where COVID-19 is a risk directly related to your work or if you and your workers are particularly concerned about the impact of COVID-19 on your business or people, then you will want to put some policies or other measures in place to manage the risk.
But there are not ‘a few’ as I pointed out in my article linked at the top of this post - there are hundreds - if not thousands! The references to specific covid risk assessments are absent from the Worksafe website, but I did find this reference in their guidance booklet (full pdf attached below):
What are the risks, exactly, if, as Worksafe have already acknowledged (quote above) that ‘covid’ (whatever it is) “is not a risk and is now like other community-based illnesses.”
The only people benefitting from this circular insanity and injustice are NZ lawyers.
Our Kiwi caselaw is sparse, our courts captured, our judges shoulder-tapped and conflicted, litigation and group action doesn’t exist, and education levels are generally low. With costs of living out of control, who would want to appoint an expensive lawyer to pursue anti-discrimination laws that apparently don’t apply if you haven’t signed an employment contract? Our situation is dire.
Thank you for those few people who a standing up against this globalist machinery - you know who you are!
I’ve highlighted here the utterly ludicrous situation where hundreds (thousands?) of highly qualified, experienced, ethical, everyday New Zealanders - teachers, nurses, doctors, salespeople, etc keen to work, yet continually excluded from the workplace and even voluntary roles, because they bravely decided to stand up for patients’ rights to informed consent and our bodily sovereignty.
This ends when we say NO!
Jacinda the global misleader needs to be ostracised from all societal contact. And, fired from Harvard.
I talked to someone a few days ago, the cost of taking on a corporation like Countdown when they fired her for not taking the jab, then threatened if she lost the court battle, she'd be paying their costs too.....she settled for less than 10K. she had worked for them for 2 decades.