"Subsection bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) "
Appropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed— of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.
So as long as the employer tells you the consequence of not taking it is getting fired, they are covered.
I don't agree that vaccines should be forced in this way, I just don't see this particular clause as a good legal defense.
You are going to be fired, for sure.
The point is to get your legal claim on the record for later use.
If the synthetic experimental mRNA spike protein jab turns out to have adverse side effects, companies that forced employees to take it are going to be held legally liable.
Remember, the Nazis never thought they’d lose the war and be held to account either. Their defenses (1. Just following orders, 2. No rules in total war) did not save them.
“..of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product,...”
I’m guessing that is written for the actual medical results of not taking the drug/procedure. “Okay - with the procedure you have a chance of making it. Without it you will most certainly die within three months.”
But - as worded, you are correct. One of the consequences might be that you never get to work again and will probably starve to death or live a life of crime. (I’m guessing at some point government assistance won’t be wasted on the unvaccinated.)