Lumiere_du_Code
Jedi Council Member
Embedded in occupational language have always been the corner stones that pit against these new inserted covid clauses. In your case, Lumiere_du_Code, fundamental in Ukraine is this that is suppose to apply ( 7.1. Workers’ Rights on OSH - the right to refuse work assignments in cases of a workplace situation which is dangerous to life or health) and other clauses, and it is the same all over the world in many places. Of course, the inserted clauses on covid tries to nullify other clauses as it is also suppose to protect life and health. For all the reasons in so many places cited on the forum, though, these masks are a clear and present danger to life and health. To evoke meaning it needs to be evidence based to counter what has no efficacy to being with, and they can't show masks as having efficacy (although they will try with 'droplets'), and they can't make argument for mask use when it is applied to a hierarchy of controls - they are choosing the lowest form of control that creates the most risk - Hypercapnia was quoted way back pages ago, and all these things can be measured while the opposite is true for their enforcement of mask use. If and when workers start to exerciser their rights, and it may not be easy, it may draw attention that other workers will see, it probably would draw attention from their families, and it might bring measures to light that can't be hidden in the press. The bigger the employer and the more employees the better. The stronger the union and worker grievances the better. Health orders by state cannot ignore (again they will try) a challenge of this type when health laws counter health laws, and the challenges are not taking place at the workplace level that can be seen yet.
The truth is that the law does not work in Ukraine, and everything that is spelled out in thousands of regulations, documents, decrees and so on are just letters on paper, nothing more. When employers or the government here tell people “you can do this or that voluntarily,” it always means the opposite. They simply give you a choice: sign their document, a commitment, do something against your will, even when this is completely outside your job responsibilities or just a desire, or quit and lose your job. And in small towns like mine in particular, you have nowhere else to work. And when the minimum salary is about $ 150 (which is almost entirely spent only on communal payments), and you have a family, children, then you simply have no choice but to obey these bastards every time. And private firms and employers simply do not listen to their employees and, with any indignation on their part, they say "if something does not suit you here, write a letter of resignation." This is their standard universal answer to everything.
If I say "no" when they force me to do something against my will, I will instantly lose my job. Alone, no one can do this, but no one can unite, because everyone is afraid for their families, because these psychopaths will simply fire everyone, even if they lose profit because of this for a while. Because if they allow you to defeat them once, they will think that you will say "no" over and over again every time they want to force you to do something again. The situation is such that people will be able to rebel only when they have lost everything, only then they will not be able to be afraid of losing something, because there will be nothing more to lose.
First, you will be forced to pay huge fines for disobedience, then you will be made "alienated" and deprived of your job, ruining your work biography.