There is still no “hundred-employee” vaccine mandate

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

First, the broad strokes. Just over a month ago, Biden directed the Department of Labor and OSHA to develop the details of a COVID vaccine mandate for all US companies with 100 or more employees.

It appears (but it is not certain) that this mandate will allow several escape hatches: medical and religious exemptions, and weekly testing as a substitute for vaccination.

If there are exemptions, we don’t know under what terms they’ll be permitted.

The Department of Labor has not yet issued the regulations framing and detailing this mandate.

Indeed, as the law firm Eckert Seamans states on its website: “The President did not give a deadline or timeframe for the New COVID ETS [Emergency Temporary Standard], but it is likely to take weeks or months to be issued. Though it is a simple directive on its face, there are complex issues that OSHA will have to work out in preparing the ETS. Moreover, even though it is an emergency standard, OSHA still must build a basis for meeting the statutory criteria for emergency standards, and that takes time.”

“Recall that in January the President directed OSHA to issue a COVID ETS…and he imposed a March 15 deadline for action on that. However, OSHA did not issue the First COVID ETS until June, and even then, it applied only to healthcare settings…”

“However, if the New COVID ETS toes the line the President has drawn, it will be considerably broader and certainly more heavy handed, so it is more likely to draw court challenges from employers and others who already are declaring their opposition to such a broad mandate—and that could mean further delay.”

So we don’t yet have a set of rules for this 100-employee mandate, a month after Biden made his speech, and perhaps we won’t have those rules for some time.

Therefore, the question is: Right now, does the mandate exist?

The Eckert Seamans law firm has an answer: “The President’s statement [on September 9] itself imposes no immediate legal obligations or penalties as far as private employers under the OSH Act. It is simply an announcement that he has directed OSHA to promulgate the New COVID ETS, and provides a few details of what he expects it to contain.”

There is no mandate now. There is only an announcement that there will be a mandate.

There will be a mandate when the Department of Labor issues its regulations.

If an employer went to court now, to challenge the mandate, the judge (assuming competency and honesty) would say, “Your challenge has no merit, because there is no mandate yet.”

And if there is no mandate yet, no employer with 100 or more employees is under obligation to order his employees to take the vaccine.

Note: I’m not talking about the Biden order that all federal employees and contractors must be vaccinated. That is a different situation.

Right now, all employers with 100 or more employees who are ordering their employees to take the vaccine are doing so voluntarily.

If they are ordering their employees to take the vaccine “because we have to, because the federal government is ordering it,” they are making a factually incorrect statement.

This possibly opens the door to an employee filing an action against his employer: “I was told to take the vaccine under false pretenses…”

I’m not saying such a charge would stand up in court, but it’s worth thinking about.

On September 10, Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki took questions from reporters. She couched the 100-employee mandate this way:

“So, Congress passed a law in 1970 — the Occupational Safety and Health Act. And the reason the Department of Labor and OSHA is able to take the strong step to protect Americans from COVID [with the new mandate] is that Congress passed that law. Yesterday’s announcement by the Department of Labor is proceeding under that law. And the law basically requires the Department of Labor take action when it finds grave risk to workers. And certainly a pandemic that killed more than 600,000 people qualifies as ‘grave risk to workers’.”

“And so, if the Secretary determines workers are in grave danger, he has an obligation to issue an emergency temporary standard [ETS]. That’s exactly what he did.”

I believe this is incorrect. Psaki is implying the 100-employee mandate already exists. Her words can certainly be taken that way. But the mandate doesn’t yet exist, because the Department of Labor hasn’t issued the regulations which CONSTITUTE the mandate.

Again: ALL EMPLOYERS WITH 100 OR MORE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ORDERING THEIR EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THE VACCINE, OR ARE FIRING THOSE WHO REFUSE, ARE DOING SO VOLUNTARILY.

They’re caving in. They’re issuing orders to their employees before the regulations are issued, and before the many legal challenges against those regulations pile up—challenges which, if they chose to, they could help spearhead.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

27 comments on “There is still no “hundred-employee” vaccine mandate

  1. Rick in Phoenix says:

    Jon wrote “This possibly opens the door to an employee filing an action against his employer: “I was told to take the vaccine under false pretenses…” I’m not saying such a charge would stand up in court, but it’s worth thinking about.”

    Rick here in Phoenix: I agree with that and I believe I’ll take a “pro-active resistance” position on that by naming names of stores and managers and district managers or anyone I can find who is part of the covid cult… to make things easier for local military tribunals that will arrest and sentence them.

  2. Raven says:

    “Moreover, even though it is an emergency standard, OSHA still must build a basis for meeting the statutory criteria for emergency standards, and that takes time.” -Eckert Seamans

    In the legal Disney World known as the U.S. Federal Court System, the word “time” means “billable hours.” So take all the billable hours you want! That’s why the word “emergency” was invented.

  3. Federal Vaccine Mandate Draft: Written and Submitted

    The U.S. Dept. of Labor reports that the “initial text” of the “emergency temporary standard” for the federal vaccine mandates for private companies employing 100 or more workers has been “submitted” to the Office of Management and Budget as part of the rule process.

    Southwest Airlines Association pilots have filed a class action lawsuit against Southwest Airlines, they did a sick-out which disrupted 2,000+ flights… other airlines are working on something similar. United is going to fire 232 employees who have not gotten the jab.

  4. Sean says:

    As this 100 plus employee scam takes a few more folks unnecessarily, weeding out the ones that still wont, adding them with the others that haven’t either, it is easy to see they are coming for everyone. And are always on the move.

    Maybe creating PMA’s Private Membership Associations can offer some protections from this overreach. I’d like to know what could. Something that ultimately keeps them at bay. If Im in OSHA’s jurisdiction I want to be out of it. Fighting mandates that are lies looks like a full time job. They think in terms of electricity designs I learned somewhere. There has to be ways to sidestep, walk through, go over.

  5. No government, government appointed agency, corporation, or individual can force anyone to take any medical intervention without their express informed consent. The entirety of laws and the legal system exist based on the insurability of laws. If a law can’t be insured, it will not be codified. Because the “virus” on which this whole house of cards is predicated on DOES NOT EXIST, there is absolutely no insurability.

    The Satanists/Luciferians mind-controlling the talking heads of state know this, but they use the puppets to create an ILL-usion that there is basis for mandates, edicts, orders, and laws. People interpret the words (read: spells) incorrectly out of fear and blind obedience, then go about putting the spell on others in their family, community, etc through the propagation of fear. This fear then feeds back into the ILLUSORY Matrix and further embeds the illusion into the imaginations of people, who collectively either bring it into “reality” — or wake up from the spell and pull away the veil, just like Toto did in The Wizard of Oz. I’m glad to be here with other Totos!

    • Need A Ladder says:

      We saw this same thing play out with so called “transmission” of HIV where they made laws to criminalize spitting, having sex with someone knowing that the person could “infect” them, not revealing private test results, all of which fell flat over time but not without some people being arrested and jailed for years. Office of Medical Justice and Scientific Justice helped in this matter to clarify the same problems we are having with corona virus hysteria and dictates all of which come from at their core the lying Fauci fungal growth. OMSJ.org got people out of jail and cases thrown out using legal arguments such as those Jon is so brilliantly writing about. This is required reading!

      http://www.omsj.org/innocence-group

  6. Luther says:

    Quite a number of people, especially from he armed forces are still refusing to take the jab, and there is still no mandate for companies with one hundred employees or more. Biden had stated he wanted that to be done back in March however, there are still many exceptions to the prospect of an emergency temporary standard (ETS). There’s likely to be some mandate Biden is anxious to issue.

  7. ceecee says:

    https://www.lc.org/full-article/0909what-is-title-vii-and-why-you-should-care Title VII Explained . . .

    Sep 9, 2021
    “Let’s get straight to it: there are Americans who don’t want to take the vaccine, but also don’t want to be fired for not taking it. That’s where Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 comes in. This federal law, which applies to all 50 states and every American territory, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for both legitimately-held religious beliefs and medical exemptions.

    Straight out of 42 U.S. Code § 2000e-2, what you need to know is there in black and white:

    “It shall be unlawful employment practice for an employer — (1) to fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” (emphasis added)

    Religious exemptions should, and must be accommodated, under the law.

    Additionally, Title VII’s protections extend to nonreligious beliefs if related to morality, and ultimate ideas about life, purpose and death.

    We’re not making it up as we go along, they are.”

  8. Judith Pecho says:

    There is a great website to help those who are having difficulties in the threats of losing their jobs under jab mandates.

    You might find this web site of interest, and this couple, a pastor and his wife have been successful in getting waivers for people and plan on a law suit over the mandatory masking, quarantining, tests, and jabs. Do as your beliefs guide you but she is a very strong and determined woman who has many videos and also has a concierge program you can join to discuss your particular issues.

    thehealthyamerican.org

  9. Pam says:

    Mandates violate due process and equal protection clauses of the US Constitution and all state constitutions. Constitutions limit the government not the people. Federal and state governments have no authority to mandate any medical procedure. Government cannot tell agencies or employers to do something they cannot do themselves.

    Employers can decide on their own that they want to require this. If they do, however, they run afoul of Common Law tort principals. They would be using their superior leverage to coerce or force an employee into submitting to a medical procedure. That gives the employee a claim in tort for damages – assault and battery and, if they take the shot and are injured, a claim against that employer for damages. Employers are foolish to get sucked into this, damages could be huge.

    Also, why do they want to risk hurting their employees or lose good workers. What possible benefit is there to their business to mandate shots? There isn’t.

    A separate legal issue is the Civil Rights Act and state anti discrimination laws which forbid employers from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, gender and disability. Employers are bound by these laws and must honor employees’ exemptions. Those who are ignoring them do so because they know these laws don’t have much teeth in them – damages are limited to back pay or reinstatement. (Big corporations have bean counters, and attorneys – they know the risks and the costs.)

    Most employers have a good sense of boundaries and are not pushing the injections on their employees. Certain large corporations are going along, however, disrupting their business and losing employees. This makes no sense from a business standpoint so I suspect they’re being bought and protected with federal money. Look who the stinkers are: hospitals, airlines, Tyson, Walmart . . .

    This is part of the psyop. They’ve painted a target on the back of employers, using a few who are in on it to create the narrative. This distracts us from our real enemy and unfortunately, many will take the bait and push for laws aimed at employers. This will weaken small businesses who are least able to bear more expense. Big business wins again.

  10. Roundball Shaman says:

    “There is still no ‘hundred-employee’ vaccine mandate”

    Which of these will be found first:

    1. ‘The Virus’, or…
    2. The Hundred-Employee Vaccine Mandate, or…
    3. An actual ‘vaccine’, or…
    4. An actual President to issue such a mandate, or…
    5. A company in America that STILL employees as many as 100 people.

    Vegas is taking your bets right now.

    “If they are ordering their employees to take the vaccine ‘because we have to, because the federal government is ordering it,’ they are making a factually incorrect statement.”

    Just about everything we are told today is a ‘factually incorrect statement’. In prior days, this used to be called a LIE.

    “They’re caving in.”

    THAT’s the plan. It was all along. Never underestimate the power of the BULLY.

  11. Christine Pavlisak says:

    Weekly testing as a substitute for the shot if medical or religious exemption…How is that? Religiously I would be opposed to the shot, testing and masks too.

    And there is another question about the nasal test. It is said to be a shot itself using the same substances as the shot only nasally ….nasal vaccines do exist for quite some time so it is possible considering what some people, doctors included, have observed under microscopes.

  12. Lydia says:

    Thank you for this information, one of the most important issues about this hoax mandate.

  13. nosy neighbor says:

    What exactly difference is between 100 and 99 employees when same Bellevue-Stratford hotel HVAC system standard is allowed to be used for over 4 decades on? EVERYWHERE. Starting with federal facilities in OSHA’s own HQ.

  14. Ohgun says:

    All of these outlandish, overreaching, and tyrannical mandates are why we MUST secede from the United States. It’s time for all federal governments to be torn apart.

  15. Justin says:

    […]

    On the exemptions thing I’ve come to see as temporary bait, so selfish types take the bait, divide off, which by leaving others to resist in smaller number, that only guarantees the boot lickers will also be forced, later. No one left to resist with or for them.

    It’s a waste of energy to lap the boots of dictators by phony temporary exemptions, and running won’t stop the incursions. They always do a divide and conquer method.

    On supposed employers with more than a hundred people, they made enough money, there’s no excuse for saying others have to be invaded. Also, why would anyone work with tyrants. Makes no sense. Should go back to farming and barter.

  16. eceres says:

    No hundred employee mandate. Well then, the list so far; fakery tests, both on existance of supposed virus, and also test on having anything, then also, fakery vaccines that make no difference other than to jab us with mystery stuff and more sickness, and, fakery mandate flogging to get people to submit to that when there is no mandate. Seems to me that makes a total fakery circle.

  17. DSKlausler says:

    I believe that the legal remedy would only be warranted (if at all) when the employer offered no alternative to the poison poke. Such as Religious Exemption, or Fraud-Test-Every-Day.

  18. stephen langley says:

    Where has all the common sense and simple logic gone ?! …oh yeah, casualty of the mass psychosis.

    OSHA : OCCUPATIONAL Safey & Health. Its purview is safety & health DIRECTLY related to WORK CONDITIONS !! It is NOT yet another agency for controlling & dictating individual health choices. It exists solely to ensure that the physical conditions of performing work tasks are not harmful. It does NOT exist to protect workers from any potential, general and/or specific health threats NOT generated by the work being performed. Just because “Health” is in the Administration’s title does not empower it to mandate non-work related health standards such as PERSONAL hygiene, diet, medical procedures, etc.

    Additionally, if OSHA was exercising and enforcing its regulatory power, it would have declared mandatory surgical mask wearing as unhealthy for violating oxygen requirements in the workplace; studies and cases abound demonstrating unwarranted prolonged masking reduces adequate oxygen uptake.

    Nevertheless, the psychopathocracy marches on, misusing government agencies that were originally intended for good.

    • fiona says:

      To some extent, they can regulate personal hygiene. Washing hands after using toilet while working at a restaurant, for instance.

      However, you are right regarding surgical masks. These are BS, since virus can bypass on the sides when worn. N95 masks are different. These are designed to catch 95% of particles, including on sides. They get clogged quickly and worker will change on his/her own when breathing becomes more diffucult. There are versions with one way vents, so particles are catched on the way in. This extends lifespan.

      Here is the catch: OSHA mandates 19-21% of oxygen at the same time! Enforcing that, would throw in monkey wrench into charade of efficency of surgical masks worn whole day.

      I wonder why lawyers did not catch wind of that yet?

  19. bartollo says:

    Last time I checked, US passports were printed in India. Will that contractor be subject of this “mandate” as well?

  20. Ed says:

    There is no “emergency”, done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *