For a large number of people, it was not.
There is nothing voluntary about "take the jab or lose your job".
But again, why is any of this the fault of insurance companies?
It isn't. The insurance companies are "most likely to be nominated as the fall guys" when things go really bad. If they really do try to cancel policies for the jabbed, they will be handing over a knife that will be used to cut their own throats. There is a lot of money there that the Government would be tempted to steal as "compensation".
People must believe that the insurance companies will operate as promised and won't use "Gotcha's" to deny payouts for life insurance. Lose that belief and life insurance will cease to be a viable product. Even worse consequences are possible. Like executives and their families barricaded in burning residences with angry mobs outside.
For new life policies, with an upfront "vaccination exclusion", the situation would be vastly different. And people would have a genuine choice to make with rationally predictable outcomes. I believe insurance companies are unlikely to do that because it will set them directly against the Government narrative. But their actuaries know what is going on.
Prove there was an unholy menage de’ trois when insurance companies were involved in forcing the vax with big pharma and big business
I don't need any "proof" to rile up an angry mob that will support "reparations". Neither does the Government. And I am not asserting that insurance companies actually conspired with pharmaceutical companies force the vax and to deny payouts for life insurance. It is not in their best interest to do any of that.
They are between a rock and a hard place. On even-numbered days I actually feel sorry for them.
The companies forced them illegally, so they are liable, period.
The "Rule-of-Law" has been dead in this country for quite a while now. Large companies are certainly not being cautious about requiring the "vaccination" as a condition of employment or new hire. Why, it is almost like the executives feel that they are all exempt from any liabilities. After all, the Government says the "vaccine" is "safe and effective". And the Executive branch is urging corporations to "voluntarily" implement mandates for vaccination, never mind what the Court says.
Besides, they have more lawyers than you do. They can keep liability suites in court for decades if necessary. And it will be necessary. There are not enough corporate assets in the entire economy to pay for the prospective liabilities accrued from the deaths of 200 million people. If that comes to pass, the settlements will be at the end of a rope for all the principals who can be identified and tracked down.
The only thing that is restraining companies is "The Great Resignation". They are losing too many critical-skilled people and they cannot hire enough replacements to continue stable operations. That is explicitly the reason a few companies have back away from "mandates".
Lawyers do not make these kinds of decisions. They make up plausible rationalizations for them, so the company won't look bad.
I am pleased to read your report that your employer seems to be one of those more sensible and cautious organizations.
But the shot was a voluntary choice.
For a large number of people, it was not.
Show me one gun to a persons head. Take a jab or your fired, isn’t a force, its a choice ultimatum. Some people took the old Johnny Paycheck stance and told them to shove the job. Others cowardly out of financial fear, traded their health for job security in a job they probably hate.
What a person believes an insurance company will cover is usually revealed after they get hit by a flood, and thats not covered. Life insurances don’t cover suicide or murder, so I fail to see how or why they would cover a voluntary experimental jab.
Time will tell. Just saying that if it was the MAGA Deplorian Insurance Company, I would tell them go ahead and sue! You weren’t forced and it was experimental.