Skip to content

Staffer impacted by vaccine mandate part of $126M class action

A former City of Greater Sudbury employee is part of a class action lawsuit against dozens of Ontario municipalities, the solicitor general and King Charles

A former City of Greater Sudbury employee is part of a class action lawsuit launched against several Ontario municipalities and King Charles that alleges vaccine mandates violated people's rights.

The hundreds of former municipal employees who were fired or placed on unpaid leave for refusing to disclose their COVID-19 vaccine status are seeking $550,000 each in compensation, according to the statement of claim filed by the Rocco Galati Law Firm.

Incidentally, a similar lawsuit filed by the same lawyer against a variety of federal agencies and federally-regulated organizations was recently thrown out, with the judge calling the claims “bad beyond argument.”

The suit involves more than 200 plaintiffs throughout the province, largely first responders and essential workers, seeking a collective $125.95 million from a variety of municipalities and taxpayer-funded service providers. King Charles is also named.

“All the plaintiffs were sent home on ‘leave without pay’ and/or subsequently fired for refusing to take the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ (inoculations) whether or not they were working from home, and/or further refused to multi-weekly PCR testing in order to continue working,” notes the statement of claim filed earlier this month in Toronto," the statement of claim reads.

“All the plaintiffs possess a conscientious and/or physical /medical reason for refusing to take  the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ (inoculation).” 

None of the allegations have been proven in court and no statements of defense have yet been filed.

In all, there are nearly 250 plaintiffs behind the lawsuit, along with almost 50 municipalities, school boards, municipal services and individuals identified as defendants.

Each of the plaintiffs are asking for $550,000 in compensation, as well as to have their employment status returned, back pay and benefits from time missed. They claim loss of their livelihood, mental anguish and distress, loss of dignity and discrimination based on their medical status.

“While ‘exemptions' to these ‘mandatory vaccine mandates’ exist, in theory, all of the  plaintiffs who sought an exemption were arbitrarily denied without reasons,” the lawsuit states.  “The plaintiffs further state that there is no obligation to seek any exemption before refusing the vaccines. 

“All the plaintiffs are ineligible for employment insurance benefits because they were  dismissed for refusing the ‘vaccines’ (inoculations).”

Released in September, 2021, the City of Greater Sudbury’s mandatory vaccine policy gave its approximately 3,000 employees until Nov. 15 of that year to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19, unless they had a valid exemption.

“As we continue to see a concerning rise in the number of COVID-19 cases locally, we remain committed to doing all we can to reduce transmission and ease the burden on our health-care system,” said then Mayor Brian Bigger. “Being fully vaccinated continues to be the best protection against COVID-19 and the Delta variant, and I want to thank our employees for doing their part to protect the well-being of our community.”

By Nov. 15, 2021, the City of Greater Sudbury had put 139 employees on unpaid leave over their refusal to disclose their vaccine status. That number dropped a bit within a few days. Of those 139 workers, 32 were volunteer firefighters. The nature of the employment of the former staffer who is part of the lawsuit is not disclosed in the document. 

The lawsuit further calls on the court to declare vaccine mandates to be “not scientifically or medically based.” It further raises questions about the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction tests, often referred to as PCR or rapid response tests, used by the various employers to check infection status.

“The plaintiffs state, and the fact is, that there is no, and there has not been, a ‘COVID-19’  ‘pandemic’ beyond and/or exceeding the consequences of the fall-out of the pre-covid annual flu or influenza,” the court filing continues.

“The fact, and data is, that the COVID-19 measures have caused, to a factor of a minimum of five (5) to one (1), more deaths than the actual purported COVID-19 has caused.”

-with files from Richard Vivian of GuelphToday

Verified reader

If you would like to apply to become a verified commenter, please fill out this form.