Grace and peace to you from God, the Great Judge and Legislator of the universe who has sole authority to dominate our consciences.
This letter serves as a reminder of my interest in teaching.
On February 12th, 2025, the Court of Appeal ruled 2-1 in favour of the Government in the Statutory Rules and Orders (SR&O) No. 28 of 2021. Subsequently, Prime Minister Dr. Ralph Gonsalves made a call in the media to public servants, including teachers, to “return to work.” These workers were illegally dismissed by the government for non-compliance with the SR&O, commonly referred to as the “vaccine mandate”. In the eyes of the Creator-GOD and just men, the mandate remains unconstitutional and against our God-given Liberty of Conscience.
Justice Esco Henry’s just judgement of March 2022 and the dissenting Justice Gerhard Wallbank in the Court of Appeal of February 2025, both agree that the SR&O was unlawful and unconstitutional.
The PSC’s decision to deem the public officer-claimants to have resigned their offices pursuant to Regulation 31 of the PS Regulations and ceased to be public officers by operation of law
under Regulation 8 of the Special Measures SR&O, is unlawful and disproportionate. Justice Esco Henry [ 246(1)c].
Justice Henry further declared that:
None of the claimants ceased to be entitled to hold respective offices of public officers or police officers within the relevant Ministries, departments or the Royal Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Police Force to which they were appointed respectively by the PSC, the Police SC and the COP and held at the relevant times. They remain entitled to hold those respective offices. [246 (6)a]
Considering the government’s flawed redefinition of abandonment, a reasonable Justice Wallbank asks the following:
Then, what about those teachers, like the respondents Ms Shaniel Howe and Ms Novita Roberts, who gave evidence that they had not abandoned their jobs, faithfully showing up for work at their respective schools until they were issued with letters dated 13th December 2021 informing them that they had resigned their employment? This begs the question: how can it sensibly be said that they were ‘absent from duty’ when they had presented themselves for duty? [293]
Or, what about those teacher respondents mentioned in the Supplemental Affidavit of Shefflorn Ballantyne, who had been fulfilling their duties virtually through an online portal until their access was denied by their employer? How had they been absent from duty, if they tried to log on to the online portal and did not have to leave their homes in order to perform their duties? [294]
Justice Wallbank agrees that:
… the decisions made by the Public and Police Service Commissions to treat the respondents as having resigned their positions pursuant to SR&O 28 were void and of no effect, for breach of elementary principles of natural justice or fairness.[547]
Please be advised that my interest in performing my duties as a Graduate teacher in St. Vincent and the Grenadines remains unchanged. I have always been interested in executing those said duties since I was appointed to the service with effect from November 8th, 1999. This year marks 26 years of dedicated service. Now, I wish to remind you and inform you of some pertinent facts and reality.
- I never abandoned my job. I was unlawfully issued a dismissal letter on February 22nd, 2022, while I was performing duties at my workplace at the St. Vincent Grammar School. As stated
in my letter to you dated January 28th 2022, up to 4th January 2022, I had been told by the Headmaster of the St. Vincent Grammar School that I had received religious exemption based on his communication with senior personnel in the Ministry of Education. Additionally, during
the Morning Cup program on NBC Radio station, on Wednesday 8th December 2021, Prime Minister, Dr. Ralph Gonsalves indicated that he had been advised that members of the Thusia Seventh Day Adventist Church, among others, had received exemptions and arrangements were
being made regarding finding accommodations.
- I received a letter from the Service Commissions on Wednesday 12thJanuary 2022, informing me that my application for exemption on religious grounds from COVID-19 vaccination, had not been approved since my employer was not able to make alternative arrangements to accommodate me. The letter further stated that I was therefore required to comply with Rule 5 of the SR&O by January 31, 2022. From the Commission’s letter, it means space would have been found, only if I had complied with the rule. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the Commissions’ claim of lack of accommodation was totally untrue.
- I did not comply with the anti-conscience, unconstitutional and asinine rule. On February 22nd, while at my workplace engaged in preparations for the University of the West Indies Master’s in Education programme (The Ministry of Education had given me permission to pursue a practicum at the school to fulfil the University’s requirement), I received a dismissal letter stating that due to failure to comply with Rule 5, “ you have been absent from duty without
leave since February 1st, 2022, pursuant to Rule 8 of the Rules”. The letter further stated that “you are deemed to have resigned your office with effect from February 15, 2022, and have ceased to be an officer, in accordance with regulation 31 of the Public Service Commission
Regulations, Chapter 10 of the Laws of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.”
- In a letter to you dated March 7th, 2022, I outlined the untruthful nature of your claim which you have no facts to substantiate. I informed you, among other things, that there is no record
anywhere, indicating to you or anyone that I had resigned from my office. I did not resign. That is the truth recorded in heaven and earth and no unjust man-made law can change that fact. I obviously did not abandon my job. In fact, even after a replacement French teacher was sent sometime in January, I continued teaching Health and Family Life Education (HFLE) classes in fulfilment of the requirements of a master’s degree in School Counselling. A few days before I got my letter, I had even prepared Minutes for the School’s monthly Staff meeting. Therefore, the claim of abandonment is totally false and no human law can change that.“ Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed to turn aside the needy from judgement and to take away the right from the poor of my people, that widows may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless…” Isaiah 10:1-3
- In view of all the factual reminders, I state that I should be compensated for the period for which I was illegally dismissed from work, by the government. I should also be reinstated to employment, with all clearly written legal guarantees regarding my job scales and benefits.
For your information, I respectfully present links to two real examples of what reinstatement and reimbursement look like respectively.
- Through a signed executive order of January 27th, 2025, President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America reinstated service members who were dismissed for refusing the COVID vaccine, with full back pay with benefits
- The Gleaner Online Newspaper reported on February 11th2025, that the Jamaican government had agreed to reimburse the salaries and allowances, with interest, to employees who were barred from their workplace under COVID-19 restrictions.
It is important to note also that the government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines based its declaration of a health emergency on guidance from the World Health Organisation (WHO). Since March 5, 2023, the director of WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared that COVID-19 as
a global health emergency was over. Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said on June 3rd 2024 that the medical emergency that was declared in St. Vincent and the Grenadines was no longer “in effect”. This means that attending rules which were temporary are expired. Rule 9 of SR&O states: These Rules expire on the day the Minister declares that the public health emergency has ended. Consequently, workers should be able to return to work, from which we were barred, without any absurd charge of “abandonment.”
I hasten to reiterate that I never abandoned my job. Therefore, this letter should not be interpreted as a reapplication, nor should it be seized upon as an admission of misconduct in the form of abandonment of duties.
