Court Upholds $7.8 Million Verdict for Transit Workers Fired for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine

Epoch Times, ^ | 12/31/2024 | Tom Ozimek

[george76]

A California judge denied BART’s requests to overturn the verdict, saying the agency failed to show an undue hardship for not granting religious exemption..

A federal judge in California has rejected an effort by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to overturn a jury verdict that awarded $7.8 million to six former employees who were fired for refusing to comply with the agency’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate on religious grounds.

In a Dec. 30 order, Judge William A. Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California acknowledged minor “imperfections” in the jury trial—including flawed instructions to the jurors—and determined they were not severe enough to invalidate the jury’s October decision requiring BART to pay each of the six former workers between $1.2 million and $1.5 million.

Alsup denied BART’s post-trial motions to overturn the verdict and seek a new trial, saying that the agency failed to demonstrate that accommodating the employees’ religious objections would have posed an undue hardship.

“Simply put, on the instructions given and evidence received, a reasonable jury could have found that BART had not carried its burden of proving its affirmative defense,” Alsup wrote, referring to the fact that, in order to prevail in the case, BART had to prove that granting accommodations such as masking, testing, or remote work in lieu of vaccination would have imposed an undue burden on the agency.

BART’s defense relied heavily on expert testimony to argue that no alternative measures were as effective as vaccination against COVID-19, with the judge noting that the agency claimed it had presented “‘unrebutted’ scientific expert testimony” to that effect. However, Alsup noted that the jury was entitled to weigh the credibility of the experts, particularly given their financial ties to the agency.

“In light of the large sums paid to the experts by BART, our jury was entitled to find that they were ‘bought and paid for,’ were merely parroting the ‘company line,’ and were not credible in light of their bias, common sense, and other evidence,” the judge wrote. “An expert witness is like any other witness, and it is up to the jury to decide how much weight their testimony deserves.”

...

Alsup’s ruling upholds the jury trial’s finding that BART had failed to prove that it would have suffered undue hardship by granting the vaccine exemptions, and that the six former employees met the burden of showing that there was a conflict between their religious beliefs and the vaccine mandate. This means that the jury’s award of $7,825,859 in damages to the six former employees stands.

[kiryandil]

BART’s defense relied heavily on expert testimony to argue that no alternative measures were as effective as vaccination against COVID-19

       

stopityerkillinme

[E. Pluribus Unum]

BART’s defense relied heavily on expert testimony to argue that no alternative measures were as effective as vaccination against COVID-19

That dog don't hunt.

[Deaf Smith]

Amazing that no one reported, used the CDC’s own VAERS to refuse the Chinavirus 2019 shot.

I followed VAERS since 04-2021.

[logi_cal869]

Good.

But absent firings & loss of pensions - and criminal convictions - for those who made the decisions, this is a Pyrrhic victory for the rest of us.

It changes NOTHING.

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

I’m waiting for the Pope to apologize. He abandoned infants and God’s people and God straight up. Ye of little fauth.

Maybe if we were fake graves in Canada, he would come personally to apologize? A tour?

[faucetman]

“Court Upholds $7.8 Million Verdict for Transit Workers Fired for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine”

I read it as Court Upholds $7.8 Million Verdict for Trans Workers Fired for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine

I didn’t know that trannies were anti vax. /s