Situation Update: Essential CA LABOR CODE STATUTE 1102.5
#california #laborcode #retaliation #workersrights
Hello folks it’s been a while. The civil litigation process in San Francisco Superior Court has begun. After the initial complaint filing there has been a key discovery and even further investigation. After reading the legal theory behind the right to refuse EUA medical countermeasures marketed as COVID-19 vaccines manufactured by J&J, Moderna and Pfizer-Biontech from https://covidpenalty.com/www.covidpenalty.com I recalled California has always codified its own statutes for damages that originate from a violation of Federal statutes. The first one that comes to mind is the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act.
In any employment or joint-employment situation the California Labor Code offers two very potent statutes that IMO holds every employer or joint-employers liable for mandates with EUA medical countermeasures marketed as COVID-19 vaccines manufactured by J&J, Moderna and Pfizer-Biontech.
The first statute is CA LABOR CODE 1102.5 ( c ) of 1102.5 states, “ (c) An employer, or any person acting on behalf of the employer, shall not retaliate against an employee for refusing to participate in an activity that would result in a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation of or noncompliance with a local, state, or federal rule or regulation.”
(f) states, (1) In addition to other remedies available, an employer is liable for a civil penalty not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per employee for each violation of this section to be awarded to the employee who was retaliated against.
(i) provides liability for joint-employers in labor agency settings. (i) For purposes of this section, "employer" or "a person acting on behalf of the employer" includes, but is not limited to, a client employer as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 2810.3 and an employer listed in subdivision (b) of Section 6400.
There’s been significant progress in an Alameda County Superior Court case against the UC Regents. This case uses the codified Nuremberg Code of California, CA Health & Safety Code 24171-24179.5 and Tom Bane Civil Rights Act. Since there’s a predicate violation of the CA Nuremberg Code any aggrieved employee or joint-employee can file an additional claim for the CA LABOR CODE 1102.5( f ) penalty not to exceed $10,000 per each separate violation.
Anything like “vaccine raffles”, a violation of CA H&S 24172 ( j ), undue influence, are fair game for a 1102.5 ( f ). Denials of sick leave, vacation pay, regular pay, suspensions, terminations, failure to pay upon discharge, all fair game under 1102.5 because they are acts of coercion under CA H&S 24172 ( j ).
IMO CA LABOR CODE 6400 is another cause of action to throw in as the burden of proof is low for the employee to object to an unsafe working condition. There will be another attempt to file the FAC at SF Superior Court. Stay tuned folks.
The great news 1102.5 has a three year statute of limitations. This statute also projects any employee or joint-employee subjected to an involuntary inoculation. Using CA 17200 the statute of limitations can be extended to four years.
There are different statute of limitations for the Tom Bane Act. Hopefully if you’re reading this and in need of legal representation you can find an attorney.