The notice (pdf<\/a>), filed on Oct. 7, said that\u00a0the 871 firefighters is seeking\u00a0$2.5 million each in damages.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe claims will be filed in Superior Court as an unlimited civil case pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure,\u201d\u00a0Kevin McBride, attorney for the firefighters, wrote in the notice.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The L.A. city council in August issued an ordinance (pdf<\/a>) requiring all city employees to have had a second dose of a two-dose COVID-19 vaccine, or a dose of the single-dose COVID19 vaccine by Oct. 5, unless they have a medical or religious exemption.<\/p>\n \u201cThe city\u2019s goal is to have a vaccinated workforce.\u00a0<\/strong>As such, employees will not have the option to \u2018opt out\u2019 of getting vaccinated and become subject to weekly testing,\u201d the ordinance reads. The mayor\u2019s office\u00a0announced<\/a>\u00a0that exempt, unvaccinated employees would still be required to do regular\u00a0testing for COVID-19.<\/p>\n McBride said in the notice of intent, citing orders given to the firefighters from the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD), that\u00a0those not exempt or fully vaccinated by the \u201chard deadline\u201d of Oct. 20 will be sent home for five days without pay, and if they still decide not to take the vaccine after another five days, their employment will be terminated.<\/p>\n The attorney wrote that the vaccination order is \u201cblatantly wrongful conduct,\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>citing several reasons including:\u00a0interference with employment rights; infliction of emotional distress; violation of constitutional privacy rights; and violation of protection of human subjects in the medical experimentation act.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n The plaintiffs are members of the\u00a0United Firefighters of Los Angeles (UFLAC). The union\u00a0stated its position in an Oct. 4 bulletin<\/a>,<\/p>\n \u201c[T]he city cannot impose any consequences relevant to the October 5 deadline\u201d to be vaccinated for COVID-19, adding that the city\u2019s ordinance \u201cdoes not provide for any consequence, and any intended discipline must first be bargained with UFLAC.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cFurther, the city has not provided any notice to UFLAC that it intends to discipline employees for not meeting the October 5 deadline,\u201d it added.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The city has 45 days to evaluate the document, after which the suit is going to be filed immediately,\u00a0reported<\/a>\u00a0The New York Times.<\/p>\n L.A. City Attorney Mike Feuer said in a statement to\u00a0KTLA<\/a>,<\/p>\n \u201cThe U.S. Supreme Court and courts across the country have upheld vaccine mandates \u2026 I\u2019m confident we will prevail.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Those who intend to sue the city comprise about one in four of the city\u2019s firefighters.\u00a0According to<\/a>\u00a0the website of the\u00a0Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD), it has 3,435 fire personnel.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.zerohedge.com\/s3fs-public\/styles\/inline_image_mobile\/public\/inline-images\/Los-angeles-LA-fire-department-700x420.jpg?itok=p_bhGiXA\")
<\/picture><\/a><\/p>\n