This source does not seem like a credible one. If someone who has some real stake to lose by reporting unsubstantiated claims makes this kind of a report, I would have an easier time believing it. But this is just some website that I didn't know existed before today.

It could just as easily be some bogus report on Blind or any other anonymous site and I would have just as much trouble believing it.

Think of a million other news reports you have heard where a union or CEO makes claim X/Y/Z and a news agency refers to a specific individual (or airs an interview with a disguised voice/appearance individual) who contradicts those claims.

Alex Berenson is famous for lying and distorting facts [1] [2] [3], so frankly the fact that he's claiming this makes me less inclined to believe it.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/pandemics-...

[2] https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/alex-berenson-attacks-...

[3] https://reason.com/2021/08/30/alex-berenson-twitter-ban-vacc...

Berenson rightly called the vaccine efficiency drop with actual data and was castigated for it. These outlets are more fixated on character assasination rather than hash out his arguments because that's so cool nowadays.

It’s not about being right. It’s about being right for the right reasons.

If you make a million predictions one of them is bound be true. Just because you’re the first to predict one thing doesn’t mean that everything you say is true, or that you shouldn’t be criticized for jumping to conclusions.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/pandemics-...

If it was a sickout why was only this company affected? The mandate was federal.

I guess the same reason not every union simultaneously opposes every policy?