Vaccine coercion/bribery

[wtburnette]

Interestingly the daily newsletter this morning for IU Health has a link to an exemption for 100% work from home employees. As much as I don't agree with the vaccine being mandatory, at least they're allowing an exemption that makes sense.

 

[jamil]

Let’s get the party started.

But also, from the article, I guess if you’re religious and get an exemption you’re not fired because you won’t spread it? There’s the state admitting faith is the way, am I right?
/s

I guess there are no atheists in foxholes or vaccine mandates.

 

[wtburnette]

I like how the scumbag Houston Methodist Hospital CEO talks about pushing 100% vaccine compliance, even though they've granted hundreds of religious exemptions. Somehow that doesn't meet 100% if you're allowing any exemptions...

 

[Romero Zombie]

Their business, their rules. I learned this on INFoil.

 

[jamil]

Interestingly the daily newsletter this morning for IU Health has a link to an exemption for 100% work from home employees. As much as I don't agree with the vaccine being mandatory, at least they're allowing an exemption that makes sense.

It would be extremely far reaching into personal lives to insist that people who cannot possibly pose any risk to other employees in the work environment are vaccinated.

 

[jamil]

Their business, their rules. I learned this on INFoil.

If we're being intellectually honest, it IS their business, their rules, in many cases. I think it's fair for Hooters to require that their waitresses look the part. Their business, their rules. If a business has a stake in employee's behavior outside of work it's their right to have those kinds of standards.

But when something is clearly beyond the employer's interest, they really have no cause to require anything.

 

[jamil]

Their business, their rules. I learned this on INFoil.

Oh. And if INGO bothers you so much, you can avail yourself of the right not to participate.

 

[wtburnette]

Oh. And if INGO bothers you so much, you can avail yourself of the right not to participate.

Yep, exactly.

 

[ditcherman]

Oh. And if INGO bothers you so much, you can avail yourself of the right not to participate.

At .02174511 posts per day he’s almost there.

 

[rooster]

I don’t understand some of you tbh. If .gov mandated everyone takes the shot or goes to jail/ gets a fine then you are loading up for a 2nd revolution but if a business says get it or else we will fire you and therefore threaten your ability to feed yourself and pay for the roof over your head then that’s ok?

Some of y’all lack consistency in messaging.

 

[JettaKnight]

I don’t understand some of you tbh. If .gov mandated everyone takes the shot or goes to jail/ gets a fine then you are loading up for a 2nd revolution but if a business says get it or else we will fire you and therefore threaten your ability to feed yourself and pay for the roof over your head then that’s ok?

Some of y’all lack consistency in messaging.

That's kind of how a capitalist and libertarian society works...


If enough businesses have mandates, then there's a golden opportunity for someone to create a new business and the their labor.

Personally I'm not a libertarian, so I'm ok with government having some control over business practices when warranted.

Laws that protect workers are a good thing in general (Triangle Shirt Waist anyone?), But in this case, businesses are acting in the best interest of all of their employees, IMHO.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I don’t understand some of you tbh. If .gov mandated everyone takes the shot or goes to jail/ gets a fine then you are loading up for a 2nd revolution but if a business says get it or else we will fire you and therefore threaten your ability to feed yourself and pay for the roof over your head then that’s ok?

Some of y’all lack consistency in messaging.

I can only speak for myself but I will tell anyone and everyone to GFY if they try pushing any of these vaccines on me.

 

[Jaybird1980]

I don’t understand some of you tbh. If .gov mandated everyone takes the shot or goes to jail/ gets a fine then you are loading up for a 2nd revolution but if a business says get it or else we will fire you and therefore threaten your ability to feed yourself and pay for the roof over your head then that’s ok?

Some of y’all lack consistency in messaging.

Are you honestly trying to compare locking someone up to firing them? SMH

 

[rooster]

That's kind of how a capitalist and libertarian society works...


If enough businesses have mandates, then there's a golden opportunity for someone to create a new business and the their labor.

Personally I'm not a libertarian, so I'm ok with government having some control over business practices when warranted.

Laws that protect workers are a good thing in general (Triangle Shirt Waist anyone?), But in this case, businesses are acting in the best interest of all of their employees, IMHO.

So if an employer mandates that all employees take BC or get fired that’s ok? What about if they mandate HIV tests weekly? Hepatitis tests?

where do we draw the line? Each one of those has the potential to impact co workers......

should we just get rid of osha and let businesses do what they want entirely? No more work comp, if you didn’t want to get hurt you should have quit and gotten a safer job.

 

[rooster]

Are you honestly trying to compare locking someone up to firing them? SMH

Why not? If most people get jailed they lose their job and economic security. It’s the same punishment with extra steps.

 

[Jaybird1980]

Why not? If most people get jailed they lose their job and economic security. It’s the same punishment with extra steps.

No it's not.

You have a Right to Liberty, you do not have a right to employment.

I will say I do not agree with businesses forcing the vaccine, but your comparison is not close

 

[Jaybird1980]

So if an employer mandates that all employees take BC or get fired that’s ok? What about if they mandate HIV tests weekly? Hepatitis tests?

where do we draw the line? Each one of those has the potential to impact co workers......

should we just get rid of osha and let businesses do what they want entirely? No more work comp, if you didn’t want to get hurt you should have quit and gotten a safer job.

You make a choice to work at a place knowing that there are risks. You choose to take those risks.
My choice of employment is a fairly dangerous occupation, I know this and choose to remain.
Your wanting OSHA and Workers Comp to be a savior makes me think you have little experience with both. You're hitching you wagon to the wrong horse on this.

 

[tim87tr]

Using taxpayer money to bribe someone to take a vaccine OR vote is wrong.. Also, by their own account only 50-60% of the employees at the CDC is vaccinated according to the CDC chiefette. She said CDC can't require employees to be vaccinated or even ask if they have been so she didn't have a number. When everyone in the Federal govt. is vaccinated then they might convince me to consider it. Although it's a small percentage, too many people have expired within an hour of being vaccinated for me to consider it.

Not sure it's a small percentage, not really reported, and classified otherwise on the death certificate. Had a relative die very soon after, then had a coworker tell me the same about his mother. Numbers on the Corona Sars are highly manipulated, so why not the shot death rate?

 

[BugI02]

It would be extremely far reaching into personal lives to insist that people who cannot possibly pose any risk to other employees in the work environment are vaccinated.

What if their computers harbor virus variants? Their hardware would need to be vaccinated, too

 

[jamil]

That's kind of how a capitalist and libertarian society works...


If enough businesses have mandates, then there's a golden opportunity for someone to create a new business and the their labor.

Personally I'm not a libertarian, so I'm ok with government having some control over business practices when warranted.

Laws that protect workers are a good thing in general (Triangle Shirt Waist anyone?), But in this case, businesses are acting in the best interest of all of their employees, IMHO.

That's how it works in theory. But businesses ban together, or gain monopolies and then control markets to create Hobson's choices to replace real market choice.

It's not clear that businesses are actually acting in the best interest of all their employees. Maybe once the vaccine has achieved all the requirements that they typically need for full approval, perhaps we could say employers are acting in their employees best interest. But maybe not even then. Are they acting in the best interest of employees who've already had COVID and have the antibodies?

It's my understanding that--and I admit this statistic may be outdated, but--there are more breakthrough cases than cases of where people were infected with COVID from people that have natural immunity, variants or not. COVID vaccines are not without risk. Why should a person who has the antibodies take a yet to be proven necessary risk, even if it's a small one? Is the science as sure about this for companies to base their employment policies on it? I don't think a decision like that is best answered by a crony market.