It’s tough to rank the discriminatory pandemic practices of the last three years. We were divided into essential and inessential workers; in blue states and cities, private school students were permitted to attend school while public school students remained shuttered at home for eighteen months; children were barred from essential developmental activities like school and sports while adults went to bars and concerts and professional sporting events in venues with more than 50,000 people; and those unable to wear masks or function when others wear them (the deaf and hearing impaired, for instance) were disregarded entirely.
Now, the findings from the recent Cochrane study, a meta-analysis conducted by a dozen researchers in six countries summarizing over seventy RCTs (randomized control trials), have made it clear: “Face coverings make little to no difference” in Covid infection and fatality rates. These trials compared the outcomes of wearing surgical masks versus no masks as well as wearing surgical masks versus the hallowed N95. No matter which mask was worn, there was no measurable difference in outcome.
What remains to be studied and discussed, in detail, are the harms that masking has caused at both the individual and societal level: language and developmental delays in children; deaf people unable to participate in society, to work, to communicate with others; victims of trauma unable to mask due to PTSD, prevented from entering public spaces. The list will go on.
One such PTSD victim is Colleen Flood, a Levi’s employee for over four years, who was fired in August 2021 for being unable to wear a mask. At the time of her termination, she was the store manager for the Riverhead outlet store in New York State.
As a victim of violent sexual assault, Flood suffered from PTSD as a result of that trauma and she was never able to wear a mask for an extended period of time. She attempted to comply with Levi’s mask mandate which was implemented as soon as stores re-opened in June 2020. But she was unable to wear a mask while working without debilitating feelings of panic and sheer terror.
Flood’s electronic medical record describes her condition as follows:
This is a 48 year old female with a history of PTSD and panic attacks who presents for initial consult. She reports that she is a survivor of a domestic violence relationship which included sexual, mental, and physical abuse, including a few incidents of being suffocated. She left this relationship 6 years ago with her young daughter. Since the mask mandate went into place at her place of work (she works as a store manager for Levi’s) she has experienced recurrence of anxiety, panic attacks, hypervigilance and flashbacks of when she was suffocated by her ex-husband. Patient [. . .] has difficulty wearing a mask for more than a few minutes at a time. She begins to experience the feeling of suffocation, surges in anxiety, hyperventilation, palpitations, and flashbacks (which include hearing her ex-partner threatening to kill her and that he will find her). This man was arrested for criminal obstruction of breathing and unlawful imprisonment 5-6 years ago but did not serve any jail time.
As the request from her doctor for a medical accommodation from Levi’s reads, Flood “has a significant trauma history which has resulted in a diagnosis of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) which includes history of physical assault (specifically being choked/suffocated against her will) while involved in a relationship that involved severe Domestic Violence (DV). Because of this history, having to wear a facial mask for extended periods of time almost if not always triggers debilitating trauma-related flashbacks which make it very difficult, if not impossible, for patient to function in her full work-related capacity… Being unable to breathe freely and comfortably often triggers flashbacks of her terrifying past experiences of her breathing being restricted against her will.”
During Flood’s tenure, she was frequently acknowledged for her contributions. As she explained to me: “I received several ‘stretch’ assignments during my employment including being ‘District Training Store Manager’ and overseeing payroll for the district of NYC. I participated in several new store openings, training and hiring, etc. and I also was voted District Pioneer by my peers in 2020.”
Beyond the recognition she received, Flood loved working at Levi’s. “It was the first company that I worked for that I began to feel as if I was a part of something.” she told me. “In the past I had worked retail because it was what I knew. With Levi’s I was actually enjoying my career and it helped me flourish! I felt as if I was part of a community. I trusted that we were all there to assist one another and the company to thrive. I felt that this company actually meant it when they spoke of taking care of their employees.”
That changed with the mask mandates. During a year-long struggle over the issue, Flood was encouraged to just try it, the suggestion from HR functionaries with no medical training being that a bit of exposure therapy would solve the intolerably adverse physical and emotional response she had to masking. She did try to wear a mask, many times, to no avail.
Flood offered every possible solution she could think of in a desperate attempt to keep her job. She offered to work in the “back of house” where inventory is kept, masking when she came into the retail selling area, where there were customers. That was denied. She offered to do her office work at home at night and work overnights in the store when there were no customers — stocking shelves, taking inventory, etc. — until the mask mandate was lifted. That was denied. She also offered to take a covid test weekly as an accommodation — this was denied by Levi’s as well.
Wearing a mask for eight or more hours a day, as was required in the store setting, was simply untenable for Flood. The feelings of panic, extreme anxiety and flashbacks of the violence she had endured, were persistent and intolerable. Eventually, after a leave of absence for short term disability, Flood received a termination letter in August 2021 that read: “We require all of our employees to be compliant with our health and safety protocols. We cannot, and will not, make an exception for you.”
It went on to state:
We believe your recent rejection of our most recent good faith offer of accommodation and continuing failure to engage in the interactive process in a way that would allow you to return to work even without a face covering, have served to frustrate the interactive process to the extent that we can no longer offer further efforts to return you to work. You should consider this formal notice that your employment is terminating forthwith, effective as of August 6, 2021.
The “good faith offer of accommodation” supposedly being extended to Flood was, in reality, no accommodation at all. It was an attempt to force Flood to submit to a pharmaceutical injection against her will. There was a two-tier system at Levi’s until February 1, 2023 when the vaccine mandate was removed for all employees. Until then, corporate employees had a vaccine mandate, field employees who interact with the public (which would have included Flood) did not. Why this two-tier system existed was never explained.
Flood refused to surrender her bodily autonomy, asserting her right to my body my choice. Ironically, Levi’s is a loud supporter of bodily autonomy for women in other contexts. In 2022, Levi’s signed the “Don’t Ban Equality” statement from the Institute for Women’s Policy research. The statement concludes as follows: “We stand against policies that hinder people’s health, independence, and ability to fully succeed in the workplace.”
It is worth noting that all of the HR employees demanding that Flood wear a mask all day were themselves working from home for the better part of three years — unmasked. And, in fact, many of Levi’s white collar office employees resisted returning to the office simply because they’d have to mask all day.
As of my departure from the company in February 2022, the return to office occupancy was never higher than approximately 15 percent on any given day. Apparently, HR conceded to the demands of corporate employees resisting return to office due to all-day masking (and other concerns), but they were just fine requiring it of store staff, even those suffering from PTSD exacerbated by mask-wearing.
Who Levi’s fires wouldn’t matter as much if they didn’t present themselves as champions of both women’s equality and of those with mental health challenges. The hypocrisy is just one illustration of the way in which these commitments are little more than branding. It’s all just a deceptive marketing ploy. And Flood learned that the hard way. One has to wonder, did the Human Resources team even stop to consider the conflict in how the company presents itself versus how it treats actual women with actual mental health challenges when they fired Flood for not being able to wear a mask?
Flood’s firing for being unable to wear a mask was always discriminatory. The fact that mask wearing is now provably ineffective, makes it all the more egregious. But the sense of righteousness on the part of the “science-following” pro-maskers justified the cruelty and discrimination, which ultimately had real costs for real human beings.
Flood’s story is just one example of the suffering brought about by the mandates set by public health officials and the Democratic Party, without any regard for real people’s everyday lives.
Eventually, in October of 2021, Flood got a job working in the office for a bakery. She also drove a truck two nights a week. She worked at the bakery for a year and a half. And while she didn’t earn what she made at Levi’s, had little paid time off and no benefits, she was grateful for the position as she didn’t have to wear a mask. Starting this March, she’ll go back to apparel retail as an associate store manager at another apparel brand. She won’t have to mask, and she’ll have benefits and paid time off again. And, she’ll get to do what she really loves.
Still, at the end of the day, she still feels betrayed by Levi’s, a brand and a company Flood once loved. She told me: “I did not check the right boxes for Levi’s, so I became collateral damage for their cause.”
