Unreasonable Request, complete account.

Video Transcript:

I'm Reasonble request from frontline hero to potentially infectious zero. The world was being whipped into a state of fear. Constant media program which started with a few stories at the end of 2019 of people falling victim to a new illness and within a few months became relentless pushing the idea that everyone was one wrong move away from encountering a fatal illness which would obliterate everyone around you. The world is finally seeming to move on to the next bout of media conditioning and how quickly some forget when they don't have constant reminders on the news reports. In the next four chapters, I will recount my struggles with refusing to cross a line into the mass madness. I, as did many avos, came up against peer pressure, love bombing and threats of financial penalties for refusing to take part, and I'm grateful to say I didn't even dip a toe. Credit where it's due, I think the most high for helping me through. Also, my thanks to D and K for advice and support, they both know who they are. Part 1. Mid March 2020, I check my working emails and I hope that my employer has finally acknowledged my milestone, and I'm pleased to say they have. There in my inbox is a message from HR entitled LSA. It's a couple of months late, but better late than never. It reads, we would like to congratulate you on reaching 15 years service. Now our organisation thank you for dedicating this time, and as a reward for your continued hard work and loyalty of you this token of our appreciation. I was actually due this in January, but in place they have finally sent me an electronic high street gift voucher. Of course, they blame the delay on the recent COVID outbreak. I ignore their excuses and were relieved it has finally come through, as my better half has already decided how it will be spent. My role for the past 15 years is a support worker, assisting adults with learning difficulties, and the truth is I love the job. Despite one pay freeze after another and numerous upper management decisions which made myself and many of my colleagues feel completely undervalued, the work itself is very pleasant, and I was pleased to work both with and alongside some wonderful individuals, some of whom had been at that home longer than me. Supporting people to live as independently as possible was incredibly rewarding. It could be challenging, but the impact of an experienced team meant you could be sure that assistance and advice was never far away. Unfortunately, at this time the mainstream press was crammed full of fear mongering about a supposed pandemic, which at the time was only striking celebrities and sport stars, and despite everyone I knew and worked with not being directly affected or even knowing anyone that had, the majority of the people around me gobbled it up, and in my workplace reasons were coming up with why those we supported should restrict their daily routines. As the months passed, so too did more and more reports about everyone being one step away from encountering someone carrying the bug. In reality, according to the statistics, it was something like one in a hundred thousand chance, and while everyone was fit and healthy, my colleagues were believing it was much worse elsewhere, and it was only a matter of time until the workplace got infected. At this time, my manager requested all staff wear surgical masks when worked on the home. For a team of about 15-20 members of staff, I was the only one objected, and was allowed to carry on my duties, albeit with some token gesturing considerations in place, none of which were taken seriously and were done to placate the human resources department. My role did not involve direct hands on support, but even if it had, I would have declined. It was quite comical at times, while my co-workers were being hounded by management to wear their pointless paper masks, I completely undermined it by walk their own bare face, and no time did I ever give in to pressure and put one on, even when I was attending an appointment at a doctor's surgery, where the person I supported was required to go in rather than be seen in the car park like some sort of inconvenience. They wanted me to come in also to age with communication, but wouldn't let me unless I put on the communal visor which had been on hand, already put together and out of any packaging. Of course, I refused on account of the potentially unsanitary storage, and used by other, most likely unwell patients. It didn't go down well and I had to wait outside exactly what I wanted and what I suggested from the beginning. I had countless reasons for declining to wear a mask and it became a bit of a joke among myself and a couple of colleagues about when I would crack, like they themselves had. In fact, most of them had never even openly resisted, instead choosing to play a game of dodge the boss, trying to get away with hanging it on their ear without being seen. But I never gave in to their requests, so I told them directly in writing that I was exempt, and they had to accept it. Just after this, the government via their ridiculous character, Boris Johnson, acting as premier, put Britain in lockdown, another thing I chose not to recognise. This was when the job role changed and I went from a support worker to a case spotter. They wanted us to look for any reason why someone could potentially be ill, meaning that I had to not only give, but also take forehead temperatures of those living in the home twice a day. I continued supporting people to go out as much as they wanted. I allowed them to make independent choices to whatever they wanted to do. They used your shopping and other outings, rather than treat them like they were already ill, much to the dismay of some of my colleagues who seemed happy not to have to support disabled people and public. There was one occasion a month or two later when my manager informed me that I may have to start wearing a mask, as one of the people needed a paramedic for completely non-COVID related reasons, and the emergency services insisted she would firstly to swap tests before they would see her. So this was being interpreted as a potential case. This was before the rapid test, so it was 48 hours before the results came back, by which time the symptoms had passed and the person was not seen. Unfortunately, this person would only live another month. Could this have been different if they had been seen as normal? I will never know. For an example of how paranoid the place had become, I remember having to talk a colleague out of phoning for a test for someone who had a mild case of hay fever. If you remember, the first lockdown occurred during an absolutely beautiful spring here in England. Polo was high in just like every year previous, the person who lived on the home started sneezing, which was not even a symptom of the dreaded plague. At this time a very bizarre ritual occurred. People were being instructed to come out of their homes on a Thursday evening and clap. It was, the mainstream media informed us, a way to show our appreciation to front-line staff. Although the main focus was on hospital staff, support workers such as myself were also remembered, although not by their employers, unless you consider a weekly box as a paper mask as a thank you. Many of my colleagues chose to bask in the glory, some of whom had even refused to come to work for much of the supposed crisis. I saw it for the love bombing it was, a trait of an abusers to shower them with praise and affection as a way of tightening their grips. It was a strange time. I was even approached by a member of the public who thanked me for doing my jobs in the midst of what was going on. We also had free pizzas delivered to the home by Domino's one Saturday afternoon. Great for those working that day, tough luck to the rest of the team though. If I seem ungrateful, it's because this wasn't a company showing their gratitude, but a publicity event to further push the fear of a pandemic virus. As the sun on us passed, with the masses glued to the news for instructions from their captors rather than out enjoying the weather, people started looking for any way they could to feel safe. Very few took my advice to stop listening to the mainstream news, and most were happy to comply with any restrictions imposed upon them. Life had taken a turn. Certain words would be used constantly on the programme in which came at you from every angle. For example, you couldn't hear a news report without them saying protection. Only the meaning had been turned on its head. For example, CQC, who are responsible for inspecting care homes to ensure they are working to a required standard, stopped visiting the very places they were supposed to protect. Meaning those living in such places would deny the yearly inspections, which ensures they are up to standard. They deemed this protecting people by not spreading germs. The irony is, it was the guidelines from CQC who had relinquished their real responsibilities that I would fullfowl of. By August 2020, the free pizzas and weekly applause would come for nothing when I exercised my right to decline what my employing would insist was a reasonable request to take a COVID test. I had constantly enforced my exemption from my own face cover. First in my workplace, then in June 2020 in my personal life, as short-lived plans to reopen shops came with the condition that masks would have to be worn by the public. Will the memories last of just how heavily it was pushed that everyone would be required to put on a face mask to go in shops or use public transport? People I knew well were telling me I would have no choice but to put a cover on, be it a scarf, surgical mask, or even an old rag picked up off the street. Unless I had something blocking my mouth and nose, I would be forced to have any train, bus or shop, I may try and enter. I told them not to believe anything they own and use, which was the source of their information. I decided to bite my tongue rather than argue with them. And certainly speak louder than words, and when the time came to send them daily photos of myself on a train or a shop, even in a hospital ward once, with my face completely uncovered it felt like an achievement. Any fretting I once had that I may eventually have to concede and cover up was swiftly swatting away following a prayer or two. Then in August 2020 another request was made in system I step over that line, away from the right side of logic and into the world of believing anyone coming near maybe a germ spoda where you have to set your mind to accept that sticking a probe in two orifices every month, increasing to three times a week, could somehow be beneficial. The reason I'd later be given for such frequent testing was truly illogical, for I'd be on the line of healthy, rational thought. What had not been needed at all for the first eight months of 2020 suddenly became an absolute necessity in order to keep everyone safe. They were also claiming Covid tests would protect our families and those around us. This was absolutely nonsense though, covering a later chapter. This was another invitation to join their fairy tale world of paranoia and fear. What was it ever almost so afraid of? The source of this fear was mainstream media and the continuous bombardment for news corporations. Back in 2017 I lost all trust in the mainstream press. Their motivation is not I've learned to share truthful information. Since reaching this conclusion, any trust I had in the mainstream media has dropped so low in my opinion as to be non-existent. And here I was going into a workplace and being forced to trust in what was a plain and simple propaganda tool. A huge cost to the taxpayer and also hugely profitable for some select suppliers. When it comes to health and wellbeing, I put my faith elsewhere. In early August 2020 my manager approached me asking me why I'd not submitted my test. All but three or four staff members were still outstanding, while some of the others welcomed these tests like they were an answer to a prayer. This was before the lateral flow test which gave a supposed result within minutes. After taking the test staff were required to box them up, fill their details on the box and then fill out an online form stating they voluntarily agreed to share their information. I simply told my manager that I did not wish to take a test. I was asked to email the regional head stating my reasons for refusing. This is something I did, detailing my lack of faith in the test. The invasive nature of sticking a probe to the back of my nose and that the idea of testing myself for an illness I did not have any symptoms of to find logic. I also stated that it was against my theological outlook. The reply back from the regional head stated that by declining a test I'd be refusing to carry out a reasonable request from management and would be at risk of disciplinary action. A similar request was sent to the other staff that had emailed their objections. Ultimately we were given a deadline which fell in early September 2020, at which time if we had not taken the test route face disciplinary action, the other staff members agreed to take the test while I stood my ground. Leaving up to the deadline, I exchanged a few emails with the regional manager. At no time did she ever acknowledge my objections, instead continuing to chant that it was a reasonable request on their part. Let's consider what a reasonable request is. If it was something that was stipulated in even your job description or employment contract, agreed that it was reasonable. A green to voluntary testing was in need though. How about something which had come up at least once in the previous 15 and a half years on the job during similar health scours? 2018 had seen a flu epidemic which was more severe in deaths at that point than CV19 was claimant to be. Also swine flu, yearly winter vomiting outbreaks and more had occurred over the years and testing never came up. I would also expect to have read and signed either a risk assessment or a policy on deforming tests, even training, considering a probe has been inserted deep into the body. I was not surprised to find out that some of my colleagues who took the test as soon as requested had no idea how deep into the nose they are actually supposed to insert the plastic swab. The truth was, demanding the staff take a test was something they had no symptoms of was an extraordinary request. I never found out that when an employer wants to introduce a new health and safety equipment, which used tests supposedly were considered, they required to hold consultation meetings with each member of staff prior to its introduction. This was something my employer neglected to do. I did have a video call meet him of the regional head in September 2020 and she said something which I would hear over and over from the various people who held investigations and disciplinary meetings with me. When I bought up my objections to sticking an object up my nose, each one asked me if I was aware that I could take the test in private. What they were implying was that they didn't really expect me to take the test as advertised. I could spit on the swab and return it for all they cared, so long as I appeared to comply with their requests. Every time someone said those words I pointed out that the easiest thing to me to do would be pretend to take a test, which I know is what some of my colleagues opted to do. I told them that I would not stand out my integrity and agree to do something I had no intention of really doing. Now, when they prepared to punish me for being honest, I was asking one of the emails from the regional head to explain why I was exempt on religious grounds. I took this opportunity to inform her that I wish but God who requires exclusive devotion. I would not even superficially put any faith in a product supplied by the government. I told them in no uncertain terms that when it comes to my wellbeing, it is your hoe I look to and nothing or no one else. I quoted among other verses Exodus 1526 and Duteronomy 3239, excerpts from the email I sent will be in the next chapter. The deadline for me to submit my test was pushed back into October, by which time they were requiring staff voluntarily take a test every week rather than the one off test they wanted in August and September. In October, the requirement jumped to three tests a week. Days passed until October 9, 2020, when at 9.30am, I was asked to come into the office when my manager gave me a final opportunity to take a test. When I declined to explain why she was suspending me on full pay for gross misconduct, pending an investigation and possible disciplinary proceedings, I was asked to leave the place I'd worked for a person 16 years without speaking to anyone. I couldn't even say goodbye to the people I'd enjoyed supporting, and I was not to contact any other members of staff during my suspension. In the next part, I will cover the accusations made against me, none of which I have approved them. Neither did my accuser, I even have to give evidence to support the claims against me, ranging from serious insubordination and bringing the organisation into disrepute, as well as, of course, failing to carry out a reasonable request. In the decade and a half, I had worked for that organisation, I had never received so much as a verbal warning. My attendance was better than most, never taking more than the odd day off, and I was fully flexible and reliable, willing to change my shift at a moment's notice. Being suspended was a surreal experience. Staff suspension was not a common occurrence on the home I worked at. In the time I worked there, it only happened when a staff member had been directly unprofessional towards one of the people we support. Now here I was being treated the same as someone who deliberately harmed another. I'd been told that being suspended was a neutral act, it did not automatically mean I'd done anything wrong, a fact that seemed to be lost on some of the people I would come up against over the coming months. I was on full pay of course, and now and have slowly the organisation acted in these situations I considered it as a holiday. It wasn't until November that I took part in an investigation meeting, done over the phone. It was a manager from another department I spoke with, I'll call her Anne, not her real name. I'd received some advice on how to handle myself in the meeting, thanks Dee. My employer gave me details of support available from staff council, but I didn't use them. My behaviour wasn't in question, it was what I hadn't done which put me in this position. In the meeting I did my best to convince Anne that I was in the right. I was strange from calling anything a hoax, but made clear my objections to taking part in the madness. Ultimately this was a mistake, I should not have told them anything. They're the ones accusing me of everything from, bringing the organisation into disrepute, serious in subordination, and of course, failure to carry out a reasonable request, yet here I was defending my personal opinions. I had expected in this meeting to have to go into what they refer to as religious beliefs. A term I objected to, as a religion is a belief based on faith alone, while I consider the faith I have in our holy created to be simple, common sense. I consider the existence of your hoax as a fact. I was surprised when the woman investigated and asked me if I was a Jehovah's Witness. When I told her I wasn't, she moved on to another subject. I would later claim my exemption based on theological crimes was completely ignored. Besides this question, which was surprising considering an email I'd sent to the regional manager back in September, excerpt of which now follow. 15th of the 9th 20th might email to the regional manager after being asked to elaborate on why I believe I am exempt from testing on religious grounds. I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to elaborate on why I would decline a test on religious grounds. Of course, personal beliefs are a sensitive subject and not something I generally raise in my work in life. I never forced my beliefs on anyone and would never use them as a reason to negate the health and safety of my colleagues or the people who use our services. However, the idea of taking this test deposes my beliefs so strongly that I cannot take part. Put into one side the validity of the test and assuming, wrongly in my opinion, that they can even give a clear indication of someone's medical state, I still maintain that being tested, especially when no symptoms are present, in no way protects anyone. Having witnessed these tests repeatedly not even being collected on time and also used as reasons to delay immediate medical attention, I thoroughly dispute their ability to protect anyone. I have found I have covered previously and forms a basis of why being tested is not compatible with my religious beliefs. I am proud to confess my love and faith in our creator named in the King James Bible as Jehovah and I accept the Holy Scriptures from Genesis to the Book of Revelations as not only historically accurate but genuine accounts written free man inspired by God. I can offer you many biblical quotes that warn us not to put our faith in the medical profession. The dr. 3239 tells us it is Jehovah who heals and determines our health and wellbeing, not doctors and nurses. Mark 525 tells a woman who enjoyed much at the hands of the physicians had spent all she had and was not helped at all. We have the same practices of medicine meant today as around in the time of Jesus, Yeshua. For there is nothing you under the sun, Ecclesiast 1 9. The Scriptures clearly show us that our adversary, the devil wicked one, is the ruler of this world, 2nd Corinthians 4 4, John 1230 etc. Our governments repeatedly demonstrate their allegiance to this entity and are the ones funding and controlling the medical profession made up of pharmaceutical companies that are motivated by profit and are not interested in or even able to heal. Let's remember that only one year ago our government was seen as incompetent greedy people reviled due to austerity cuts and seen as out of touch with a general public who were outraged by the selling off of NHS services to private companies. Get that general public and have hang on there every word. Convince we need to follow their every command in order to remain healthy. We can draw comparisons to the scientific evidence that you touched upon as being no more than a religious belief itself. We're forced to believe the testimony of government advisors no matter how far removed it is from reality and coerced into putting our faith in their every command. The difference is, while their commands and testimonies will soon fall away and be forgotten, the testimony of the apostles and the words of the prophets will remain for eternity. The truth I tell you until heaven and earth disappear not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished. Matthew 518 In what has been a very difficult year for most I have been guided and comforted by following the word of God. I have remained healthy and served the majority of those around me. No one I know has fallen to the virus. The only place I hear of it is in sensationalist news reporting by organisations that clearly show their allegiance to the aforementioned adversary who has been plaguing mankind since Garden of Eden and Genesis 3. I hope this clearly explains why I refuse to take part in such ritualistic treatment. If making this choice put my faith in our God rather than the medicine none of today means I am refused the opportunity to learn a living art, then it is a situation I confidently face. Safe in the knowledge that you are, who has looked after me all my life, will not forsake me now. What will it profit the man if he gains a whole world yet forfeited soul? Matthew 1626 As I have previously stated, if I were a dishonest person I would be clear of having to explain any of this. I stated at the start of this email I will never force my beliefs on anyone or try to influence any person to avoid medical treatment. For an example of a belief being pushed on people we need only look at what is being done to everyone and around the world in the guys of keeping us safe. Yours truly. I meant everywhere in that email. They directly asked me to explain my beliefs so that is what I did. When it was brushed aside in the investigation meeting with a vague question about Jehovah's Witnesses it demonstrated just how little I as an employee meant to them. I was an inconvenience, something none of these people wanted to deal with when they were all living in fear of what the newsreader would tell them next. Actually two of the people I had come across including Anne during these meetings told me they were self-isolating and here was someone suggesting they should be exempt from being afraid every time someone comes to near to them. At the end of that investigation I made the point that testing was inhumane to which Anne replied that she considers going to the dentist inhumane. My immediate response was to point out that no one is being forced to visit the dentist in order to remain employed. I ended the meeting by encouraging Anne to stop listening to the news. I also told her that these accusations against me would have to be justified and proven on their part. Afterwards I didn't feel good about how it had gone. I didn't know exactly what but something was troubling me. I was informed that when she had finished her investigation a decision would be made as to whether any disciplinary action would be taken. It would be another six weeks or so before I received an email informing me that I was being asked to attend a disciplinary hearing on the 18th of December 2020. Once again it would take place on video call and once again I could have either a union representative or fellow staff member prison which considering the meeting was being done online I didn't consider worthwhile. I was informed that I was being accused of the following failing to safeguard the health and well-being of colleagues and service users. Accents or emissions likely to bring the organisation into disrepute. Serious in subordination. Any substantive reason. Failure to carry out the reasonable request of colleagues and supervisors. As I said at the start of this chapter suspension for my workplace was a rarity and dismissals were practically unheard of. In my 15 plus years at the home I knew of three people who had been suspended all for their behaviour directly towards the people being supported. While none of them caused any lasting physical harm I considered their behaviour much worse. I can't go into too much details on those incidents however all of them returned to the workplace after receiving a warning for their behaviour. In the next chapter I'll explain what it was niggling me about the investigation meeting that I couldn't put my finger on at the time because the same thing would happen again in the disciplinary. I would be facing a panel of three headed by a manager from another home as well as two members of the Human Resources Department. Part 4. At midday on the 18th December 2020 I sat down in front of a computer to take part in my disciplinary meeting. The panel consisted of Sarah, not her real name, a manager of a home in another area, a human resources manager and a notaker. They demanded answers from me on wire, didn't appreciate the arrival of testing like so many of my colleagues had. I also found myself at one point in the hour long call explaining how I would manage a pandemic. They never addressed my requests for them to back up any of the government suggestions that was out using the product I must be considered a risk. So much of that argument for why I should be repeatedly violated with a plastic probe involved what if situations. I was stunned when Sarah had the nerve to retort to my suggestion that a test could cause an injury to the nose or mouth that we can't spend our time worrying about what ifs. It summed up the situation perfectly. The unfairness from my point of view was apparent in the bait and switch tactic my employees were using when I attempted to demand justification for their coercive behaviour. I state that all I had done was to decline a request which appeared nowhere in any of the mountains of literature generated by the organisation. I had been directed to the Care Quality Commission guidelines and government website. I point out the paragraph that clearly states testing is voluntary but is brushed aside. As a conclusion that I was in the wrong had been drawn by the panel long before the meeting took place on that chilly winter morning. It would be five weeks until the outcome was reached. A week or so prior I had received a couple of emails from Sarah asking if my outlook on testing had changed. In one of the emails I was asked if staff being vaccinated alongside regular testing made any difference to my decision. I was given a deadline to answer by or they would consider my stance unchanged. I refused to answer instead pointing out that I was still waiting for a decision on my conduct and that I did not appreciate being given deadlines when they do not stick to their own. When the outcome letter was eventually emailed to me at the end of January 2021 it was no surprise to see they upheld the accusations of failing to safeguard the people around me. I saw a mission likely to bring the organisation into disrepute and serious in support of the nation as refusing a test is put in lives at risk. Failure to carry out reasonable instructions was upheld despite being the same accusation found under serious in support of nation. I was clued of failing to follow policy and the any other substantive reason but my behaviour warranted my dismissal. The letter concluded that I had been a valued member of staff and they would like to offer me the job back if I agreed to comply with testing or when the government advice changes. Now even my original accuser, the home manager I had worked alongside for 14 years ever having to account for their claims against me I was sacked. The offer of a return to work if I would just play along completely undermine the recriminations for which I was being dismissed. You don't tell someone who has committed grossness conduct that they can have their job back if they will only admit they are in the wrong. I was informed I had seven days to appeal this decision which I did as soon as I had written up my grounds to deserve him one. They also gave me a period of three months notice in which time I was on garden news. This may sound generous but for a contradiction I did that I had done anything wrong. Newing up to the appeal which took place on the 25th of February 2021 once a game via an online video meeting I began preparing for my appeal. I became familiar with logical fallacies and how they cannot stand up in a legal case such as an employment tribunal. I learned the names mostly from watching the Nathan Oakley YouTube channel. As I heard the definitions of each one it dawned on me exactly what they had used to justify their decision. I could apply at least one to every upheld allegation. I began writing them up to use in the appeal. Here is what I came up with and read out at the start of the meeting, giving them minute take or some work. It began in response to the allegations which were upheld against me. I will explain how these were considered using logical fallacies as well as making predictions and assumptions which were not backed up with any evidence or proof. I made sure everyone knew what logical fallacy was quoting from the 2015 publication, argument types and fallacies in legal argumentation. Affiliate's argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is. Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, or others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance. I then gave two examples. Begging the question or circular reason then. Begging the question is a fallacy in which a claim is made and accepted to be true, but one must accept the premise to be true for the claim to be true. For example, why was he suspended from work because he did something wrong? How do you know he did something wrong because he was suspended from work? Appealing to authority or an argument from authority. A logical fallacy in which a person producing a claim references the opinion of an authority as evidence to support an argument. I challenged that the allegation that I had failed to safeguard those around me relied on an assumption I was carrying an infectious disease in the first place. I pointed out that if government statistics were enough to make that claim, despite official figures in the month I was suspending, and mounting to a one in twenty thousand charm, they could also justify dismissing me for theft based on higher numbers of that being reported that confirmed cases. I've since realised that by forcing staff to prove their healthy status, they were reversing the burden of proving their own claims. They have to prove I was a risk which they could never do. I also asked if they could provide proof using the scientific method that asymptomatic people can pass on a virus as they had repeatedly told me, or they just fall back to a logical fallacy. As for bringing the charity into disrepute, this conclusion requires them to divine the thoughts of the public, as well as calling into question the organization's ability to protect their employees' personal medical status. In the meeting I also stated that demonstrating they consider the objections of their employees may look good for them in the long run. I read out the legal definition of serious insubordination. From employment law experts peninsula, the legal definition of serious insubordination is typically classified as threatened and rude or aggressive behaviour towards the manager, employer or owner of a business. Showing disrespect to superiors, such as with vulgar or mocking jibes, employers should not misrepresent the following actions as insubordination, and employing question in the legality or ethics of a task. They had redefined it as a refusal to carry out the instructions or tasks set out by a manager or employer, although there is not a single occasion when anyone instructed me to take a test. I was offered the opportunity to be tested and declined, which the reasonable response to any offer. Finally, I refuted the claim I felt to carry out reasonable instructions from colleagues or superiors, as they stated the advice and instructions were coming from CQC and government who were not my work colleagues. I also pushed him the point that my refusal on theological grounds was completely ignored in the disciplinary meeting. Sarah, who was part of this meeting as well, claimed I had said I had no religious beliefs, which I told them was a convenient interpretation of a statement I made in both my meeting with her and in my emails to the regional head that I don't have faith-based on blind belief, the actual meaning of religious, but on what I consider to be stone-cold facts. So their decision to dismiss me definitely has to be considered on religious grounds to use their words. From in my opening statement, they attempted to question me on my views about testing. I immediately shot down this line of interrogation, stating that my thoughts and opinions then and there were completely irrelevant to my behaviour and conduct, leading up to the 9th of October. The response to the meeting came on the 5th of March just over a week later. They upheld every decision against me. Nothing I could have said or done in any of the meetings I took part in would have convinced them that I could exclude myself from their level of fear and panic. If I wanted to remain employed then I would have to take that test. I genuinely meant why I told them. Even pretending to take a test was not an option for me. Even if every other member of staff had agreed, which as far as I know they did, I still could not publicly put my faith in the same government who my know to be committed to deceiving us. I made it clear that I wanted to keep my job, but not if it means just attracting one eye otter from the faith I put exclusively in your hoar. The book of Isaiah in the 65th chapter talks of those who forget God. Instead spreading a table for the God of good luck and poor wine for destiny, rather than trust exclusively in God, will be led to the sword. In this case the tiny plastic swords continue to be stuck in people's noses and down their throats multiple times a week. A year later and there is still an absolute requirement for homes under CQC for as long as they are available for free. I will make a prediction as soon as homes have to pay for the tests themselves, they will stop asking staff to take them. After thoughts. At the time of writing this, it has been just under a year since I received my final months pay April 2021. Testing is still a requirement for support workers so I have had no offer ever return to that job. I did of course contact citizens advice to start proceedings for an deferred dismissal. They referred me to a grant funded organisation who tried to negotiate early conciliation, who clarified what I would consider a reasonable outcome. I told them anything from reinstatement to statutory redundancy which amounted to about 15 weeks pay considering the length of my employment. When I replied came from my previous employers just over a month later, stating that they would be very confident of winning a tribunal, so would only make a commercial offer of what I might do about another month's wages to avoid their cost of legal fees. As well as an agreed reference I could give to future employers, I decided to accept it. There was due to the supposed pandemic and length of you queue waiting to go to court. I could be waiting months, even years for a tribunal to take place. While I would not rule out a return to supporting people with needs and vulnerabilities, I've used the time to learn some skills, educate myself and put my faith in the most high. While I miss full time employment, I have found I have not gone without any of lesson necessities. I do not regret my decision to refuse to bow to their insanity. I never cross that line no matter how daunting it may have seemed to remain this side of reason. I'd like to thank anyone who has taken the time to follow my account in its entirety. I have no plans to see screen content for the various places it gets published. Please feel free to reach out to me for any information or advice. Isaiah 665. You who tremble at his word, hear the word of your hoar. The brothers who hate you and exclude you because of my name have said, let the Lord be glorified if they seek your joy. But they will be questioned.