More than 30 ATCO employees have launched court action against the Calgary-based energy company for requiring employees to be "fully vaccinated" against COVID-19 as a condition of employment. .Most of the ATCO employees listed as plaintiffs are not vaccinated, oppose being vaccinated for various personal reasons, and all oppose being required to attest to their vaccination status. .Calgary-based civil litigation lawyer Leighton Grey of Grey Wowk Spencer LLP took on the group and will represent its legal challenge against ATCO. ."The Plaintiffs claim that vaccination absent informed consent and forced disclosure of their private health information about their COVID-19 vaccination status to ATCO under the threat of administrative and/or disciplinary measures ranging from unpaid leave to termination of employment constitutes serious human rights violations," reads the statement of claim. .The majority of employees involved in the lawsuit have worked for the ATCO Group for between 10-20 years — Sebastian Leybold, a senior control centre operator with ATCO for 25 years, being the longest serving employee within the group. .Matthew McCarthy, one of the plaintiffs and a former senior distribution operator who worked at ATCO for more than 17 years, told the Western Standard he and his fellow co-workers worked safely throughout the pandemic for nearly two years.."ATCO consistently told us that they were just following AHS guidelines," said McCarthy of the mandatory vaccine policy forced on all employees in the fall of 2021. ."So when AHS dropped their mandates and allowed their employees to go back to work without any form of testing requirements we felt that we would be going back to work as well. Especially considering the fact that we were willing to do Covid testing."."ATCO dug in their heels even harder at this point going against the earlier statements of following AHS guidelines and recommendations.".McCarthy said ATCO brought forward a "vaccine incentive program" before the mandates were put in place offering all employees $1,000. ."This was done to further coerce the employees, as well as a clever way to find out what percentage of their employees were vaccinated, without actually asking," said McCarthy. .Grey has been involved in several legal challenges for other large corporations including CNRL, CP, and most recently, WestJet. ."The vaccine mandates are an attack on the working class," Grey told the Western Standard. ."These mandates are not about health," he said. "They are an attempt to control Canadians and their children and get them to comply." .Grey called it an "existential battle" that his clients are committed to fighting. ."Not enough is being done. No one is advocating for Canadian workers. These companies could be applying pressure against the federal government to do away with these mandates, but they are not — at least not publicly." .Grey said, sadly, some of his clients lost everything in this fight and are "living in cars," but are "so committed to fighting this." .ATCO introduced its Workplace Vaccination COVID-19 Standard policy on Oct. 28, 2021 that required all employees to "demonstrate they were vaccinated or have an approved exemption" and "disclose their private health information" by January 1, or face being placed on an unpaid leave of absence. Employees who still had not complied by May 2 were terminated. .The statement of claim says the bulk of the collective agreements between ATCO and the unions representing its employees included a "zero-tolerance" policy for discrimination or harassment of all workers, but each were supplemented in October 2021 with the implementation of the policy. ."The Policy requires all ATCO people must be vaccinated and provide Proof of Vaccination by 1 January 2022. Violation of the Policy comes with administrative and disciplinary measures up to and including unpaid leave and termination of employment," says the statement of claim. ."Policy is clear: get vaccinated or get lost. The Policy has created a hostile and toxic work environment at ATCO and no viable alternatives were offered following 1 January 2022.".The statement of claim also argues the policy does not allow for COVID-19 testing as an "appropriate alternative" for those opposed to being vaccinated or disclosing their private medical information. .It also stated that possible exemptions for employees on the grounds of religious or medical reasoning were "illusory at best" and said ATCO "failed to take requests for exemptions or accommodations seriously." ."Many Plaintiffs applied for an exemption; all of them were denied despite legitimate grounds," says the statement of claim.."With the application process seeming futile, the majority of the Plaintiffs chose not to file their own applications, despite legitimate grounds.".The statement claims the policy not only "discriminates against an identifiable group of Canadians," but it is also "incongruent with its claims of promoting safety and wellbeing." .It also claims statements within the policy are false or erroneous, including the statement "vaccination is the best defense against the COVID-19 virus" and "will prevent the transmission of the COVID-19 virus" and "will safeguard the health of ATCO people, business partners, customers, and our communities." ."The Plaintiffs say ATCO is legally obliged to respect the autonomy and dignity of their employees, and the confidentiality of their medical information; they are obliged not to use medical knowledge to violate the human rights and civil liberties of their employees, even under threat from government authority. These duties have not been demonstrated in the application of the Policy.".The plaintiffs are claiming punitive damages for "measurable damages, including mental distress, anxiety, and, in particular, injury to dignity and self-respect," along with any "future economic losses."
