Threats and Coercion

Introduction

The previous three sections of this chapter argued that there are no good reasons to try vaccinating the population en masse, yet that is precisely what governments around the world ostensibly sought to do during the “Covid-19” pseudopandemic. Scandalously, experimental products with minimal safety data were even offered to pregnant women and children, with the pressure of expectation being placed on virtually everyone to take them.

But what about those who refused? Around April 2021, it became evident that more heavy-handed tactics would be used against those who did not comply. For example, consider WHO guidance dated April 13, 2021:

Contemporary forms of “mandatory vaccination” compel vaccination by direct or indirect threats of imposing restrictions in cases of non-compliance [...] Despite its name, “mandatory vaccination” is not truly compulsory, i.e., force or threat of criminal sanction are not used in cases of non-compliance. [...] Still, “mandatory vaccination” policies limit individual choice in non-trivial ways by making vaccination a condition of, for example, attending school or working in particular industries or settings, like health care. Such policies are not uncommon [...]. (WHO, 2021, pp. 2-4, my emphasis)

Here we see the origins of the coercive – though typically not illegal – policies that were rolled out by governments transnationally in a bid to maximise “vaccine” uptake. The threat of imposed restrictions was, unfortunately, a key driver of that uptake (see Hughes, 2024a, pp. 300-303).

The day after the WHO issued the above guidance, Professor Michael Northcott (2021) noted in a submission to the UK Science and Technology Committee that threats to those refusing the “vaccines” and “vaccine passports” had already extended in various jurisdictions to loss of access to “business, cultural, economic, educational, employment, political, religious and social organisations and venues,” as well as the ability to travel, use a bank account, receive social security, and even leave the place of residence.

For Lieutenant General Jonathon Riley (2021), also writing on April 14, 2021, “What became apparent was a coercion strategy – and that all the population would have to be vaccinated whether they needed it or not.” Or at least, that was the sense that was strongly created at the time.

Under the guise of “safety” and “protection,” the messaging shifted to not giving people a choice about taking the injections. For example, according to UNICEF (2021), “no one is safe until everyone is safe,” and the accompanying UNICEF advertisement threatened: “Nobody gets out of the Covid-19 pandemic until we get everyone protected around the world.” This was later echoed by Klaus Schwab’s (2022) menacingly intoned claim that “nobody will be safe if not everyone is vaccinated.”

UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock claimed on May 19, 2021, that it was “incredibly important” to “get vaccination even to the final few percent and encourage that take-up” (Department of Health and Social Care and the Right Hon. Matt Hancock MP, 2021). The mission statement, so to speak, was clearly to “vaccinate” everyone.

The Threat of Unemployment

A key lever used to drive “vaccine” uptake was the threat of unemployment. On October 15, 2020, the World Health Organisation openly called for the extortion of employees in order to further the “vaccination” agenda: “being able to stay in the workforce and provide for one’s family, might also encourage vaccination” (WHO, 2020, p. 9).

It did not take long for that idea to filter down to the national level. For instance, on November 13, 2020, Tom Tugendhat became the first British MP to suggest that employment should be made contingent upon vaccination: “I can certainly see the day when businesses say: ‘Look, you’ve got to return to the office and if you’re not vaccinated you’re not coming in’” (cited in Williams, 2020).

The Mail asked on November 25, 2020, “Could UK employers force staff to get a Covid vaccine? Lawyers say mandatory jabs might be legal but are ‘highly unlikely’ while the Government has no power to make someone accept one” (Blanchard, 2020). The issue was not so much the dubious legality of forcing staff to take the shots, but rather to create the misimpression in the public mind that it might be possible for employers of any kind (not just in healthcare) to do so.

On January 28, 2021, the Telegraph published a comment piece titled “No jab, no job policy should be the law” (Lynn, 2021). The former Chancellor of the Exchequer and erstwhile editor of the Evening Standard, George Osborne (2021), wrote “If governments don’t police [vaccination], then businesses will.” The BBC proposed on February 18, 2021, that “‘No jab, no job’ policies may be legal for new staff,” citing Justice Secretary Robert Buckland and proposing that new staff could be jabbed first, existing staff later (“Coronavirus: ‘No jab, no job’ policies may be legal for new staff,” 2021).

Yet, blanket “no jab, no job” policies, especially for existing employees, would have been legally risky, because employers could have faced unfair dismissal or discrimination claims depending on the circumstances. Whether an employer could lawfully have required vaccination depended on factors such as the nature of the job, health and safety obligations, whether the requirement was a reasonable management instruction, potential discrimination issues under the Equality Act 2010, and human rights considerations. Legally speaking, vaccine mandates for businesses are a minefield, yet every effort was made to convince the public that businesses could introduce vaccine mandates on a whim.

The House of Commons Library briefing document, Coronavirus: Returning to work (April 13, 2021) states that “The UK Government asks employers to encourage staff to get vaccinated against Covid-19” (Ferguson, 2021, p. 29, my emphasis). This is different from asserting the right of businesses to mandate vaccination.

A World Economic Forum article dated May 17, 2021 asked “Will employees be required to get the COVID-19 vaccination?” (Charlton, 2021). Citing a survey by the Rockefeller Foundation, the WEF, and Arizona State University, it claimed that 88% of employers would require/encourage employee vaccination (of which 40% will require it and a further 16% will require it for at least some employees). Consequences for non-compliance included not allowing employees to return to the physical workspace (favoured by 44% of employers) and “disciplinary action up to termination” (favoured by 31%). There was no reference to the legality of such measures, only the conjuring of a sense of inevitability that “vaccination” would soon be coming to the workplace, like it or not.

UK media headlines on May 18 and 19, 2021, read “This is what we do about anti-vaxxers: No job. No entry. No NHS access” and “Threat to Army jab refuseniks: Troops who decline Covid vaccine could face discipline, official papers suggest” (O’Grady, 2021; Nicol, 2021). Here again is the threat of imposed restrictions and disciplinary measures. Whether or not those restrictions and measures could actually be implemented made little difference to the effectiveness of the threat, which most people assumed to be real. Many demoralised workers consented to getting the “vaccine” on the false assumption that they would have to do so anyway.

Pimlico Plumbers

Pimlico Plumbers, whose PR was once handled by disgraced publicist Max Clifford, is no stranger to political communication. In 2018, for instance, it erected a controversial “Bollocks to Brexit” sign on top of its Waterloo premises.

In January 2021, Pimlico Plumbers’ managing director, Charlie Mullins, announced plans to introduce “no jab, no job” contracts for employees, a move which, according to the Guardian, would entail the company “drafting new employment contracts for its 400-strong workforce to include the vaccine requirement, although employment lawyers questioned whether it would be legally enforceable” (Jolly, 2021).

Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi branded the move “discriminatory,” misleadingly implying that a plumbing company could, of its own volition, introduce vaccine mandates for employees (Scotto di Santolo, 2021).

A plumbing company is representative of the trades, and tradespeople in particular would have paid attention to the Pimlico Plumbers story. Pimlico Plumbers was widely cited as an example of a company mandating vaccination for employees.

For example, the House of Commons Library briefing document mentioned above notes that

the Government has not legislated to require or prohibit employers from checking the vaccine or Covid status of staff or customers. Nevertheless, a number of employers have implemented so-called “no jab, no job” policies that require new staff to be fully vaccinated. (Ferguson, 2021, p. 30)

“A number of employers”? The attendant footnote references only one company: Pimlico Plumbers. The briefing document was intended as a guide for politicians, who may therefore have gleaned the misimpression that employers could lawfully introduce “no jab, no job” policies of their own accord, based solely on the Pimlico Plumbers story.

By May 30, 2021, Pimlico Plumbers boss Mullins (then 68) had still not been “vaccinated,” despite “Covid-19 vaccines” having been available to the 65-69 age range since mid February 2021 (Castle, 2021).

Although Mullins had first announced the “no jab, no job” policy in January 2021, it was not until June 10, 2021, that the company put out a job advertisement making “coronavirus vaccination” a condition of employment for new staff (Jackson, 2021). As for existing staff, Mullins announced six days later that from January 1, 2022, all “unvaccinated” employees (excluding those with medical exemptions) would be “given the boot” (“Covid vaccine: Pimlico Plumbers to force staff to have jab”, 2021).

There was an obvious problem with this, however, namely that existing work contracts were unlikely to include any mention of vaccination against “Covid-19,” meaning that new contracts would have to be drawn up (“Employment rights offer UK immunity to mandatory workplace Covid jabs,” 2021). There are no verified reports of this having happened, or of Pimlico Plumbers having fired anyone for refusing the jab, despite Mullins’ highly-profile threats to do so.

In September 2021, by which time all eligible adults in the UK had been offered the shot, Mullins sold his 90% stake in Pimlico Plumbers for over £125 million, removing any obligation to follow through on his threats to fire unvaccinated employees (Harding, 2021).

The entire Pimlico Plumbers story therefore appears as a psychological operation designed to deceive the public that employers could, of their own volition, introduce “no jab, no job” policies, and thus to demoralise workers into getting the jab when there was no need to do so.

US Federal Government Mandates

Two executive orders signed by President Biden in September 2021 mandated “Covid-19 vaccination” for all executive branch employees plus certain employees of federal contractors, subject to medical and religious accommodations (Paretti et al., 2021; Shen, 2022). This covered over four million workers, including ca. 2.9 million in the federal civilian workforce, the large majority of whom had already consented to getting injected.

Previously, vaccines had only been mandated within the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Indian Health Service, and the National Institutes of Health. Biden’s executive orders marked a significant departure in that respect.

However, the main executive order, EO 14043 (issued on September 9, 2021), which required injections for federal executive branch employees, was implemented unevenly and only partially enforced. Relatively few employees were fired for violating it. Tens of thousands of requests for medical and religious exemptions first had to be processed. Most agencies also followed a lengthy disciplinary process that included counseling, education, suspension, and opportunities to comply before removal (Runyan, 2023).

On January 21, 2022, typically before those disciplinary processes were completed, a federal district court issued a nationwide injunction blocking enforcement of EO 14043 while litigation proceeded. Agencies generally stopped taking adverse employment actions based on the mandate, and many administrative processes were paused. The mandate technically remained on the books, but was largely unenforceable because of the injunction.

The “vaccination” requirement for federal employees, federal employees, and international air travellers was rescinded on May 11, 2023, and EO 14043 was revoked in January 2025 (The White House, 2023; Executive Office of the President, 2025). Once again, the threat of job losses for not taking the “vaccine” largely came to nothing.

OSHA’s Vaccine-or-Test Requirement

On November 4, 2021, the White House (2021) announced that the Department of Labour’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was introducing a requirement for employers with 100+ employees to ensure that all employees were “fully vaccinated” by January 4, 2022, or tested twice weekly for “Covid-19.” This would affect an estimated 84 million workers, or approximately two thirds of employees nationwide (Mason et al., 2021).

OSHA issued the Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) on November 5, 2021, when it was published in the Federal Register.

However, on January 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked OSHA’s vaccine-or-test requirement, finding that “Although COVID-19 is a risk that occurs in many workplaces, it is not an occupational hazard in most” (National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 2022). OSHA’s authority is limited to occupational hazards.

The court ruled that OSHA could regulate where the danger is occupational — for instance, research laboratories working with the virus, healthcare settings, and crowded or high-risk work environments.

However, the court found that when an agency claims the power to make decisions of vast economic and political significance, such as would have affected 84 million workers, the authority for doing so must be clearly delegated by Congress. In the case of OSHA’s ETS, this was not the case.

OSHA formally withdrew the ETS on January 26, 2022 (de Vogue, 2022; OSHA, 2022). Once again, executive power had run up against legal constraints.

“Covid-19 Vaccination” Mandates in the US Military

“Covid-19 vaccination” was mandated for active-duty and reserve US military personnel via an order issued by the Secretary of Defence on August 24, 2021 (Department of Defence, 2021). All branches of the US military were covered, and “vaccination” requirements were enforced through military chains of command, subject to medical and religious exemptions. Service members were told that their careers depended on compliance.

The US military “vaccine” mandate was arguably the most controversial of all such mandates, because it was enforced with gruesome consequences, as documented in the film Duty To Disobey (Burrowes, 2026).

A primary focus of the film is “involuntary immunization,” i.e., forced vaccination against the individual’s will. Instructions for carrying out the military mandate called for “using as much force as necessary.” In the documentary, a brigade surgeon, Lieutenant Colonel Theresa Long, M.D., recalls her horror upon receiving such instructions, stating “That’s, by definition, medical rape.”

The documentary shows that military personnel were physically and psychologically abused, to the point of being hospitalised. During the period of the mandate, 1,000 of them committed suicide.

The astonishing point made by the documentary is that because the order to take the “vaccine” was unlawful, service members had a duty to disobey the order. That is how far things went.

Ominously, one service member observes that “Once [a practice] becomes normalized in the military, it often very quickly finds its way into the civilian population.” This is precisely why the US military mandate must not be forgotten or condoned.

The military mandate was eventually rescinded in January 2023 after Congress required the Department of Defence to end it in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Department of Defence, 2023).

Conclusion

The use of threats and coercion to maximise “vaccine” uptake was one of the most unseemly and sinister aspects of the entire “Covid-19” operation. Why did governments and their private sector partners resort to such measures to get unlicensed, experimental technologies into the arms of as many people as possible?

Threatening people’s livelihoods through was particularly egregious, and the legacy media bears significant culpability for deceiving the public that job losses could follow in any sector based on a refusal to take the shots.

The case of Pimlico Plumbers in the UK looks, in retrospect, like an obvious psychological operation intended to make tradespeople and other ordinary workers assume that their employer could make “vaccination” a condition of employment. That was never the case, however, and there is no evidence that Pimlico Plumbers employees were forced to get “vaccinated.”

In the United States, the OSHA mandate that applied to two thirds of employees nationwide was not backed by an executive order and was struck down by the Supreme Court. “Vaccine” mandates for executive branch employees and employees of federal contractors proved similarly toothless when a federal district court issued a nationwide injunction. Nevertheless, it is astonishing that such mandates were attempted.

The “Covid-19 vaccination” mandate for US military personnel was most disturbing because its enforcement through military chains of command. That form of “medical rape,” as one bridge surgeon characterised it, must never be allowed to happen again, let alone become normalised or enter the civilian population.

Part 5 will explore “vaccine” mandates for healthcare workers and the ongoing threat of such mandates for the wider population.

Support My Work

If you valued this content and are not a paid subscriber, please consider leaving a one-off tip for an amount of your choosing.

If you would like to make a one-off or recurring donation to help fund my work in general, I would be most grateful. There are numerous ways of doing so, including wire transfer, Paypal, UK cheques, and Buy Me A Coffee.

If you have not done so already, please consider taking out a subscription to davidahughes.net or upgrading an existing one – free, paid, or gold-tier.

References

Blanchard, S. (2020, November 25). Could UK employers force staff to get a Covid vaccine? MailOnline. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8986867/Could-UK-employers-force-staff-coronavirus-vaccine.html.

Burrowes, B. (Director). (2026). Duty to disobey [Film]. Children’s Health Defense Films. https://dutytodisobeyfilm.com/.

Castle, A. (2020, May 30). Charlie Mullins admits to not having Covid vaccine – despite requiring employees to be jabbed. LBC. https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/andrew-castle/charlie-mullins-admits-to-not-having-covid-vaccine-despite-requiring-employees-t/.

Charlton, E. (2021,May 17). Survey: Will employees be required to get the COVID-19 vaccination?” World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/05/employers-covid-19-vaccination-homeworking/.

Coronavirus: ‘No jab, no job’ policies may be legal for new staff. (2021, February 18). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56113366.

Covid vaccine: Pimlico Plumbers to force staff to have jab and fire those who refuse. (2021, June 16). ITV News. https://www.itv.com/news/2021-06-16/covid-vaccine-pimlico-plumbers-to-force-staff-to-have-jab-and-fire-those-who-refuse.

Department of Defence. (2021, October 1). Mandatory Coronavirus Disease 2019 vaccination of DoD civilian employees (OSD008990-21). https://media.defense.gov/2021/Oct/04/2002867430/-1/-1/0/mandatory-coronavirus-disease-2019-vaccination-of-dod-civilian-employees-osd008990-21-resp-final.pdf.

Department of Defence. (2023, January 10). DOD rescinds COVID-19 vaccination mandate. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/article/3264323/dod-rescinds-covid-19-vaccination-mandate/.

Department of Health and Social Care and the Right Hon. Matt Hancock. (2021, May 19). Health and Social Care Secretary’s statement on coronavirus (COVID-19): 19 May 2021. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/health-and-social-care-secretarys-statement-on-coronavirus-covid-19-19-may-2021.

de Vogue, A. (2022, January 13). Supreme Court blocks nationwide vaccine and testing mandate for large businesses, allows health care worker vaccine mandate to take effect. CNN. https://kvia.com/politics/cnn-us-politics/2022/01/13/supreme-court-blocks-nationwide-vaccine-and-testing-mandate-for-large-businesses-allows-health-care-worker-vaccine-mandate-to-take-effect/.

Employment rights offer UK immunity to mandatory workplace Covid jabs. (2021, August 8). The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/08/employment-rights-offer-uk-immunity-to-mandatory-workplace-covid-jabs.

Executive Office of the President. (2025, January 31). Revocation of certain executive orders (Executive Order 14174). Federal Register, 90(20), 8637. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/full_text/html/2025/01/31/2025-02098.html.

Ferguson, D. (2021, August 16). Coronavirus: Returning to work. House of Commons Library Briefing Paper Number CBP 8916 (April 13, updated 5 May and 16 August). https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8916/.

Harding, L. (2021, September 20). Pimlico Plumbers sold to US firm Neighborly. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58632984.

Hughes, D.A. (2024a). “Covid-19,” psychological operations, and the war for technocracy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Jackson, B. (2021, June 10). Pimlico Plumbers advert risks discrimination claims. HR Magazine. https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/content/news/pimlico-plumbers-advert-risks-discrimination-claims.

Jolly, J. (2021, January 14). Pimlico Plumbers to introduce ‘no jab, no job’ work contracts.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/14/pimlico-plumbers-to-introduce-no-jab-no-job-work-contracts-covid.

Lynn, M. (2021, January 28). No jab, no job policy should be the law. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/01/28/no-jab-no-job-policy-should-law/.

Mason, J., Aboulenein, A., & Hunnicutt, T. (2021, September 10). Attacking anti-vaccine movement, Biden mandates widespread COVID shots, tests. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-deliver-six-step-plan-covid-19-pandemic-2021-09-09/.

National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 595 U.S. ___ (2022). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf.

Nicol, M. (2021, May 19). Threat to Army jab refuseniks: Troops who decline Covid vaccine could face discipline, official papers suggest. Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9593865/British-Army-troops-decline-Covid-19-vaccine-face-discipline-official-papers-suggest.html.

Northcott, M. (2021, April 14). Evidence on the proposed introduction of a Covid vaccine certificate system (vaccine passports) in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. https://covid-unmasked.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Evidence-on-Proposed-Introduction-of-Vaccine-Passports-by-Professor-Michael-Northcott.pdf.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2022, January 26). Statement on the status of the OSHA COVID-19 vaccination and testing ETS. https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/ets2.

O’Grady, S. (2021, May 18). This is what we do about anti-vaxxers: No job. No entry. No NHS access. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/antivaxxers-vaccine-coronavirus-nhs-b1849437.html#Echobox=1621346192.

Osborne, G. (2021, February 9). To lead a normal life you’ll need a Covid passport - here’s why. Evening Standard. https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/george-osborne-covid-passports-normal-life-b919119.html.

Paretti, J., Hammock, B., Goldstein, D., Wood, J., & Mishra, D. (2021, September 9). White House announces vaccine mandates for employees of large private employers, federal contractors, and most healthcare employers. Littler. https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/white-house-announces-vaccine-mandates-employees-large-private-employers-federal.

By Jim , Brad Hammock, David Goldstein, Jeremy Wood, and Devjani Mishra

Riley, J. (2021, April 14). Weasel words and broken promises — A roadmap to endless lockdown. TCW. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/weasel-words-and-broken-promises-on-the-road-to-endless-lockdowns/.

Runyan, D. (2023, July 27). Written testimony before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability: Because I Said So: Examining the Science and Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates. United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Danielle-Runyan-Testimony-FULL-PACKET-small-FINAL91.pdf.

Schwab, K. (2022, April 10). Nobody will be safe if not everybody is vaccinated [Video]. YouTube.

Scotto di Santolo, A. (2021, January 18). Pimlico Plumbers’ Charlie Mullins lambasted by Zahawi over ‘discriminatory’ vaccine rule. Daily Express. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1385399/pimlico-plumbers-charlie-mullins-nadhim-zahawi-coronavirus-vaccine-vn.

Shen, W.W. (2022, May 17). State and federal authority to mandate COVID-19 vaccination (CRS Report No. R46745). Congressional Research Service. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46745.

The White House. (2021, November 4). Fact sheet: Biden Administration announces details of two major vaccination policies. Internet Archive Wayback Machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20211104141006/https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/04/fact-sheet-biden-administration-announces-details-of-two-major-vaccination-policies/.

The White House. (2023, May 1). The Biden administration will end COVID-19 vaccination requirements for federal employees, contractors, international travelers, Head Start educators, and CMS-certified facilities. Internet Archive Wayback Machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20230501220546/https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/05/01/the-biden-administration-will-end-covid-19-vaccination-requirements-for-federal-employees-contractors-international-travelers-head-start-educators-and-cms-certified-facilities/.

UNICEF. (2021, May 24). No-one is safe until everyone is safe – why we need a global response to COVID-19. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/no-onesafe-until-everyone-safe-why-we-need-global-response-covid-19.

Williams, T. (2020, November 13). Anti-vaxxers “could be banned from going into work if they refuse Covid jab.” The Metro. https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/13/covid-vaccine-refusal-could-result-in-ban-from-going-to-work-13587535/.

World Health Organization. (2020). Behavioural considerations for acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines: WHO Technical Advisory Group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences For Health, meeting report, 15 October 2020. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/337335/9789240016927-eng.pdf.

World Health Organisation. (2021, April 13). COVID-19 and mandatory vaccination: Ethical considerations and caveats. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/340841/WHO-2019-nCoV-Policy-brief-Mandatory-vaccination-2021.1-eng.pdf.