Employer requiring the jab...

[Tom Slick]

Question for y'all that do not want to get the jab, but your employer has decided to make it mandatory to remain employed. Were you able to get a religious or medical exemption? Or did you find another work around to get out of having to get the shot? What has been your experience and how did you navigate this situation?

 

[ridebig]

My understanding is that they can’t ask unless it’s voluntary. If you say I choose not to say your good.

 

[azsunfun]

this all has yet to be tested in the courts.

 

[Singleton]

They can’t mandate as part of employment until fully authorized. With the jab still EUA, volunteer basis unless government job (they don’t follow their own rules).

 

[GRADS]

Easiest way around it is to quit.

 

[was thatguy]

Question for y'all that do not want to get the jab, but your employer has decided to make it mandatory to remain employed. Were you able to get a religious or medical exemption? Or did you find another work around to get out of having to get the shot? What has been your experience and how did you navigate this situation?

Hasn’t been mandated by my current employer.
It’s more likely to be mandated by one of their clients to access a jobsite.
Currently, I will not do it if they order it
Simply put, they don’t pay me enough.
Having said that, when I’m back at my “normal” job (hopefully later this year) I will rethink that position because it’s about double the pay.

 

[ridebig]

It’s unbelievable we are at a point this is lawful. Any company that requires a jab is libel if shit goes side ways down the road. But the government or big pharma

 

[monkeyswrench]

Easiest way around it is to quit.

Says the guy with no job!
(Don't worry, I don't have a real one either )

I was wondering about this though, as it will effect a lot of people...my wife included.

 

[Bobby V]

Question for y'all that do not want to get the jab, but your employer has decided to make it mandatory to remain employed. Were you able to get a religious or medical exemption? Or did you find another work around to get out of having to get the shot? What has been your experience and how did you navigate this situation?

At the company I work at. If you got the shot. No mask. If no shot. Wear the mask.

 

[MagicMan]

The mandate has been tested in Texas

In what is believed to be the first court decision on the issue of mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations, the U.S. District Court for Southern Texas upheld a hospital’s policy requiring that all of its employees must be vaccinated in order to remain employed. The hospital suspended almost 200 employees after they failed to get vaccinated by the hospital’s deadline, and announced that it would terminate their employment if they continued to refuse the vaccine. Approximately 117 employees filed a lawsuit challenging the policy. The court, in Jennifer Bridges et al v. Houston Methodist Hospital, easily dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the hospital had the right to require all of its employees to be vaccinated in order to continue working there.
In her complaint, the lead plaintiff posited the oft-cited argument that individuals cannot be forced to be vaccinated against COVID-19 because, at present, the vaccines have only received emergency approval from the FDA. Thus, she claimed that her employer’s vaccine mandate violated federal law regarding emergency vaccines because federal law requires the Department of Health and Human Services to warn consumers of the “potential benefits and risks of use” of such a vaccine and give them “the option to refuse administration of the product.” The court made short shrift of this argument, explaining that this provision is aimed at the Department of Health and Human Services, not employers, and that it neither expands nor restricts the responsibilities of private employers. In fact, the court stated that it “does not apply at all to private employers like the hospital in this case.”
The court similarly dispatched the plaintiff’s argument that the hospital was coercing its employees to act as “human guinea pigs” in human research trials on pain of termination of employment, noting that the hospital was neither approved for nor engaging in human trials so the rules regarding coercion during such studies did not apply. As to the plaintiff’s argument that the mandatory vaccination requirement was akin to “forced medical experimentation during the Holocaust,” the court deemed the argument “reprehensible” and dismissed it out of hand.
Finally, the court held that the plaintiff was not being coerced to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Offering a choice between vaccination and termination of employment does not amount to coercion. The hospital’s decision to require its employees to be vaccinated was made to keep staff, patients and their families safe. The court aptly noted that the plaintiff is free to be vaccinated or not, as she chooses. If she chooses not to be vaccinated, she “will simply need to work somewhere else.”
While this case was decided in Texas, it may have persuasive value for similar cases in Connecticut and surrounding states. As we have discussed previously, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s most recent guidance makes clear that employers can require employees to be vaccinated so long as they make reasonable accommodations for disabilities and sincerely-held religious objections to vaccination. While mandatory vaccination policies are most likely to be upheld in situations where employees are working with vulnerable populations such as hospitals and nursing homes, if crafted properly they are likely to enjoy broader application as well.
Employers, however, must be careful not to implement the policy in a way that would discriminate against any protected class of individuals, and may want to ensure that all employees have a way to easily access the vaccine. Employers should also have a procedure in place to assess requests for reasonable accommodations due to disabilities and/or sincerely-held religious beliefs. Pullman & Comley’s employment lawyers are available to help you craft a mandatory vaccine policy for your workplace.
Tags: COVID Lawsuit, Department of Health and Human Services, EEOC, FDA, Mandatory Vaccination, U.S. District Court for Southern Texas, Vaccination Polic

 

[Icky]

I think with all the work out there, it would be stupid to terminate people over this. That being said I would let them fire me.

 

[530RL]

The general consensus is that Employers can require vaccination for at will employees subject to standard exemptions.

If you are not an at will employee it gets complicated.

The lawyers are all over this in my corporate board work.

Companies will be subject to litigation by both pro and anti-vaccines groups. My basic conclusion is we are getting sued by both groups so just budget for the litigation.

 

[TITTIES AND BEER]

Ours ask if we will get it , no I won’t , my contract didn’t have anything in it so no .

 

[ridebig]

Hasn’t been mandated by my current employer.
It’s more likely to be mandated by one of their clients to access a jobsite.
Currently, I will not do it if they order it
Simply put, they don’t pay me enough.
Having said that, when I’m back at my “normal” job (hopefully later this year) I will rethink that position because it’s about double the pay.

Only do the j and j jab I was told by my doctor. And only if you have to. I’m fortunate (I think) I own my own business and can call the shots lol.

 

[was thatguy]

I think with all the work out there, it would be stupid to terminate people over this. That being said I would let them fire me.

Yep.
Set em up!
Hey, a fentanyl junkie got his family $27 million just for od’ing, unlawful termination is worth something!

 

[DWC]

At the company I work at. If you got the shot. No mask. If no shot. Wear the mask.

Same here. It’s a SoB

 

[530RL]

I think with all the work out there, it would be stupid to terminate people over this. That being said I would let them fire me.

Put yourself in managements position. Do you lose some of the 90% who agree with vaccinations or lose some of the 10% that does not?

 

[monkeyswrench]

So, in Texas the courts say if you are asked, and don't get vexed, you can be fired...it is not coercion, just a choice...

So, employer says have sex with them, or get fired...no longer a choice?

Both have unknown long term outcomes. Both could be seen as the employer f'king an employee...

 

[was thatguy]

It’s unbelievable we are at a point this is lawful. Any company that requires a jab is libel if shit goes side ways down the road. But the government or big pharma

Amen.

Sometimes stepping back and looking at the overall picture can be sobering.
A LOT of todays topics get argued in the secondary theatre.
These are topics that should NEVER be up for discussion in this Nation.
We get tied up in the tangents when the topic itself should not even be a discussion.

Its why I buy ammo.

 

[was thatguy]

Put yourself in managements position. Do you lose some of the 90% who agree with vaccinations or lose some of the 10% that does not?

Is that the ratio at your S Korean plants?

 

[was thatguy]

So, in Texas the courts say if you are asked, and don't get vexed, you can be fired...it is not coercion, just a choice...

So, employer says have sex with them, or get fired...no longer a choice?

Both have unknown long term outcomes. Both could be seen as the employer f'king an employee...

I think the TX decision will be challenged to be inapplicable outside of a healthcare facility (hospital).

 

[Bobby V]

Is that the ratio at your S Korean plants?

Tap Tap Tap….

 

[mjc]

I magically got the shot per my vac's card on saturday.

 

[Tom Slick]

Welp, the healthcare system that my wife is an employee of just sent out the email that states get the jab by September 1st, or loose your job. The only exemptions are religious and medical and you better have concrete proof of either and it's still the hospitals discretion.

My understanding is that it is entirely legal for private companies to make it mandatory. I do however find it absurd that any company would take on the liability should something happen to the employee post jab. But I have to assume that the legal departments have done their homework and can claim that the employee will have zero recourse.

Sadly our University's and healthcare systems seem to be jumping on the mandatory train.

 

[was thatguy]

Tap Tap Tap….

Weak sauce super clown.
Cmon man, step it up.

But to the point, where does that 90/10 ratio he’s throwing out come from?

Hw JUST SAID that he is budgeting for litigation from both sides?
So I’m curious if that 90/10 split is just his normal foreshadowing to argue a made up point?
Or is it a figure from his ventures?
No tapping involved.

 

[pronstar]

The mandate has been tested in Texas

In what is believed to be the first court decision on the issue of mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations, the U.S. District Court for Southern Texas upheld a hospital’s policy requiring that all of its employees must be vaccinated in order to remain employed. The hospital suspended almost 200 employees after they failed to get vaccinated by the hospital’s deadline, and announced that it would terminate their employment if they continued to refuse the vaccine. Approximately 117 employees filed a lawsuit challenging the policy. The court, in Jennifer Bridges et al v. Houston Methodist Hospital, easily dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the hospital had the right to require all of its employees to be vaccinated in order to continue working there.
In her complaint, the lead plaintiff posited the oft-cited argument that individuals cannot be forced to be vaccinated against COVID-19 because, at present, the vaccines have only received emergency approval from the FDA. Thus, she claimed that her employer’s vaccine mandate violated federal law regarding emergency vaccines because federal law requires the Department of Health and Human Services to warn consumers of the “potential benefits and risks of use” of such a vaccine and give them “the option to refuse administration of the product.” The court made short shrift of this argument, explaining that this provision is aimed at the Department of Health and Human Services, not employers, and that it neither expands nor restricts the responsibilities of private employers. In fact, the court stated that it “does not apply at all to private employers like the hospital in this case.”
The court similarly dispatched the plaintiff’s argument that the hospital was coercing its employees to act as “human guinea pigs” in human research trials on pain of termination of employment, noting that the hospital was neither approved for nor engaging in human trials so the rules regarding coercion during such studies did not apply. As to the plaintiff’s argument that the mandatory vaccination requirement was akin to “forced medical experimentation during the Holocaust,” the court deemed the argument “reprehensible” and dismissed it out of hand.
Finally, the court held that the plaintiff was not being coerced to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Offering a choice between vaccination and termination of employment does not amount to coercion. The hospital’s decision to require its employees to be vaccinated was made to keep staff, patients and their families safe. The court aptly noted that the plaintiff is free to be vaccinated or not, as she chooses. If she chooses not to be vaccinated, she “will simply need to work somewhere else.”
While this case was decided in Texas, it may have persuasive value for similar cases in Connecticut and surrounding states. As we have discussed previously, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s most recent guidance makes clear that employers can require employees to be vaccinated so long as they make reasonable accommodations for disabilities and sincerely-held religious objections to vaccination. While mandatory vaccination policies are most likely to be upheld in situations where employees are working with vulnerable populations such as hospitals and nursing homes, if crafted properly they are likely to enjoy broader application as well.
Employers, however, must be careful not to implement the policy in a way that would discriminate against any protected class of individuals, and may want to ensure that all employees have a way to easily access the vaccine. Employers should also have a procedure in place to assess requests for reasonable accommodations due to disabilities and/or sincerely-held religious beliefs. Pullman & Comley’s employment lawyers are available to help you craft a mandatory vaccine policy for your workplace.
Tags: COVID Lawsuit, Department of Health and Human Services, EEOC, FDA, Mandatory Vaccination, U.S. District Court for Southern Texas, Vaccination Polic

This will be appealed to a higher court, and eventually scotus, methinks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Icky]

Put yourself in managements position. Do you lose some of the 90% who agree with vaccinations or lose some of the 10% that does not?

That ratio is closer to 50/50 and that's only cause half of them would get fake cards. Like others we are following the CALOSHA protocol, no more, no less. Again with the shortage of qualified people out there, now isn't the time for firing people for stupid reasons.

 

[was thatguy]

Welp, the healthcare system that my wife is an employee of just sent out the email that states get the jab by September 1st, or loose your job. The only exemptions are religious and medical and you better have concrete proof of either and it's still the hospitals discretion.

My understanding is that it is entirely legal for private companies to make it mandatory. I do however find it absurd that any company would take on the liability should something happen to the employee post jab. But I have to assume that the legal departments have done their homework and can claim that the employee will have zero recourse.

Sadly our University's and healthcare systems seem to be jumping on the mandatory train.

The religious waiver will be a point of contention going forward.
If goat worshiper “A” gets a waiver then prepare for the lawsuits based on religious favoritism.

 

[was thatguy]

That ratio is closer to 50/50 and that's only cause half of them would get fake cards. Like others we are following the CALOSHA protocol, no more, no less. Again with the shortage of qualified people out there, now isn't the time for firing people for stupid reasons.

Which is exactly why I asked him if that 90-10 was from his S Korean plants.

 

[Icky]

Which is exactly why I asked him if that 90-10 was from his S Korean plants.

I didn't think him or regor we allowed out of the dungeon

 

[Xtrmwakeboarder]

Same here. It’s a SoB

Same. Then again, my employer hasn’t asked employees for proof so some employees could be pretending they are vaccinated and walking around unmasked.

 

[Singleton]

The religious waiver will be a point of contention going forward.
If goat worshiper “A” gets a waiver then prepare for the lawsuits based on religious favoritism.

Daughters school district just changed the religious waiver. Now requires priest, rabbi, etc to sign off on the form, parents can’t just say it. They also said until fully authorized by FDA, no decision if students will be required to get the shot. I asked if the flu shot was mandatory and the look from some parents was insane

 

[azsunfun]

Put yourself in managements position. Do you lose some of the 90% who agree with vaccinations or lose some of the 10% that does not?

what about back in early 80's drug testing, we had drug free citicens for constitutional rights! 90/ 10 reversed.

 

[was thatguy]

Same. Then again, my employer hasn’t asked employees for proof so some employees could be pretending they are vaccinated and walking around unmasked.

And this is my point about secondary debate.
Masks do nothing, yet the jab alleviates the necessity?
It’s insane.

 

[DWC]

Which is exactly why I asked him if that 90-10 was from his S Korean plants.

90/10 isn’t even close to a thing. Not even a thing with 65 and older crowd actually closer to 75%. When you get under 50 it’s 50% and under. Dive in by state and the numbers are even more dramatic.
We’ll see how ballsy employers are to mandate it and lose people.

 

[C-Ya]

I am just asking this question out of personal curiosity........

For those of you who choose not to get vaccinated, do you have passports or any desire to do international travel? If so, what country is going let you in without proof of being vaccinated?

Not looking for flames...... just curious if this is even a consideration.

 

[was thatguy]

90/10 isn’t even close to a thing. Not even a thing with 65 and older crowd actually closer to 75%. When you get under 50 it’s 50% and under. Dive in by state and the numbers are even more dramatic.
We’ll see how ballsy employers are to mandate it and lose people.

View attachment 1023433 View attachment 1023434

So pending a factual response (beyond Bobby’s tapping) we can assume the 90/10 post to be simply hyperbole and foreshadowing to a make believe Segway, correct?

 

[DWC]

Same. Then again, my employer hasn’t asked employees for proof so some employees could be pretending they are vaccinated and walking around unmasked.

My CA team has to send me a form to sign and return back to say they’re vaccinated. I can’t ask for proof. Just sign and send back..

 

[was thatguy]

I am just asking this question out of personal curiosity........

For those of you who choose not to get vaccinated, do you have passports or any desire to do international travel? If so, what country is going let you in without proof of being vaccinated?

Not looking for flames...... just curious if this is even a consideration.

Ive had current passports since childhood.

I actually use it as my primary ID anywhere outside of my cars.
I don’t foresee travel requirements in my future that would require me to get vaccinated.

 

[GRADS]

I think you guys are scared of needles if you want my honest opinion.

 

[was thatguy]

I think you guys are scared of needles if you want my honest opinion.

Did I say you could talk???

 

[azsunfun]

I think you guys are scared of needles if you want my honest opinion.

if it had actual antibiotic like say pennicillin, all in.

 

[DWC]

So pending a factual response (beyond Bobby’s tapping) we can assume the 90/10 post to be simply hyperbole and foreshadowing to a make believe Segway, correct?

I’m sure there’s a segment of the population where 90% think everyone should get vaccinated. It’s not a state or age group. Pretty sure it’s not even the medical field or even CDC employees. I would be interested to hear how many of the vaccine manufacturers employees have had the jab…. Bet a few cold ones it’s not 90%

 

[Tom Slick]

I am just asking this question out of personal curiosity........

For those of you who choose not to get vaccinated, do you have passports or any desire to do international travel? If so, what country is going let you in without proof of being vaccinated?

Not looking for flames...... just curious if this is even a consideration.

I actually just had this conversation with a buddy of mine a few minutes ago. If having proof of vaccination becomes a thing for air travel and/or international travel, or travel all together I am fine with not traveling again.

 

[Tom Slick]

I’m sure there’s a segment of the population where 90% think everyone should get vaccinated. It’s not a state or age group. Pretty sure it’s not even the medical field or even CDC employees. I would be interested to hear how many of the vaccine manufacturers employees have had the jab…. Bet a few cold ones it’s not 90%

Shoot, the CDC hasn't even made it mandatory for their employees.

 

[Wonderbread]

I’m just wondering if the vax works, why would it matter who is vax’d and who isn’t?

if an individual is vax’d the only way his vax works is if he contacts only others with the vax? If said individual comes into contact with a non vax’d individual the vaxlonger works and both individuals die?

sounds like a really bad plot to a really bad jonna hill movie

 

[azsunfun]

international travel?, claim your a immigrant at u.s. border when coming back to u.s., no vax, no passport, no money, where you want to go?

 

[Wonderbread]

I think you guys are scared of needles if you want my honest opinion.

when is your next near death experience?

 

[530RL]

90/10 isn’t even close to a thing. Not even a thing with 65 and older crowd actually closer to 75%. When you get under 50 it’s 50% and under. Dive in by state and the numbers are even more dramatic.
We’ll see how ballsy employers are to mandate it and lose people.

View attachment 1023433 View attachment 1023434

It’s not 90 percent for those returning to the office it is 100 percent and HR must confirm with the state health department.

For those that don’t wish to return that is their choice.

But the people who want to come back and be part of the team, they want people to be vaccinated and support the decision.

I and others support the right to choose.

 

[DRYHEAT]

I guess I just don’t understand HIPAA laws, I thought our medical information was supposed to be private.