Biden to require all federal employees to be vaccinated

[Gaius46]

That (bolded above) allows Biden (and Psaki) to assure us that he did not violate his previous promise not to support (impose?) vaccine mandates.

Exactly. And cut off any lawsuit based on the fact that the vaccine has yet to be fully approved.

 

[Cope]

Nope. Even federal government can have dress codes:

https://www.ecityworks.com/federal-government-employee-dress-code

No difference in your eyes?

 

[The AntiDonald]

This is not a personal matter. It’s about workplace safety. You might as well be advocating for the freedom to drive drunk.

That is correct. All OSHA has to do is declare that the unvaccinated make the workplace unsafe to employees. I don't think any court would argue with that. The main reason being that it's temporary during the state of a health emergency, which we are still under.

 

[Gaius46]

There is no nonsense in my post. If it was as sure as the sun coming up in the east, then it would already be approved.

But that is irrelevant to the point I am making.

It is currently not approved. Is it lawful of the government to require an unapproved vaccine as a component of keeping your job.

If you are thinking that the conversation is over, I would ask you to wait and see if any federal employee files a grievance upon termination or suspension for violating this rule.

You don’t have to be vaccinated. You can opt for regular testing. That moots the entire question of mandating a vaccine under an EUA.

 

[ataraxia]

No difference in your eyes?

No. What difference do you see?

If anything, dress codes are just about workplace professionalism. Vaccines are about workplace safety- seems even more important.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Or submit proof of a negative covid test weekly (at their own expense) to maintain their jobs.

I would have preferred to eliminate the weekly testing option but I'll settle for this.

Announcement coming from the White House tomorrow.

BRAVO!

I agree with the mandate. Nobody has to work for the government so you have a choice. Comply with health and safety standards or find employment elsewhere. I have no problem with this. That goes for any job. If I still owned a business I would not want someone endangering my health or the health of other workers working for me. You don't have to get vaccinated and I shouldn't be put at risk because of your beliefs either. The constitution protects the right of the people and that includes not letting people endanger our life because they refuse vaccination and are spreading a deadly disease.

 

[The AntiDonald]

You don’t have to be vaccinated. You can opt for regular testing. That moots the entire question of mandating a vaccine under an EUA.

I can imagine that there aren't too many people that want to be tested twice a week while footing the bill for it. There is no reason the gov should pay for the testing when their already paying for the vaccine. So far as I know it's only once a week. But some people are advocating for twice a week.

I am guessing there will be a few resignations. Loosing an easy lifetime gov job because your stupid. Oh well.

 

[Chillfolks]

The number of trump voters is kinda like fish story, it grows every time it's told.

That is the total number of votes cast against Biden. So you did not realize there were other candidates besides Trump.

 

[911Sparky]

That is the total number of votes cast against Biden. So you did not realize there were other candidates besides Trump.

Guess I didn't think about that.

 

[Jay59]

Sure it does. Where did you hear otherwise? The freedom of speech does not mean you can yell fire in a crowded movie theater.

There is no such thing as unlimited rights, even constitutional ones.

It is definitely true that no right is unlimited. However, workplace safety regulations do not rise to the same level.

Laws generally yield to rights. The theatre case is not protected free speech, so it's a red herring.

How is any right to privacy implicated here?

It's the basis of the right to choose abortion. all of that law is potentially relevant.

That is correct. All OSHA has to do is declare that the unvaccinated make the workplace unsafe to employees. I don't think any court would argue with that. The main reason being that it's temporary during the state of a health emergency, which we are still under.

If you are arguing that the situation is temporary, then the judge would close the workplace until the temporary event passed. If the business is open, then some reasonable accommodation must be made. Generally rights trump laws.

 

[The AntiDonald]

It is definitely true that no right is unlimited. However, workplace safety regulations do not rise to the same level.


It's the basis of the right to choose abortion. It's an issue solely between the person and the healthcare provider.


If you are arguing that the situation is temporary, then the judge would close the workplace until the temporary event passed. If the business is open, then some reasonable accommodation must be made.

The reasonable accommodation has already been made. Get vaccinated (free), or get regular testing. Otherwise that employee can find new employment. What more do you need?

 

[Gaius46]

It's the basis of the right to choose abortion. all of that law is potentially relevant.

Are pre-employment physicals legal? Is the right to privacy implicated there?

 

[OscarLevant]

Or submit proof of a negative covid test weekly (at their own expense) to maintain their jobs.

I would have preferred to eliminate the weekly testing option but I'll settle for this.

Announcement coming from the White House tomorrow.

BRAVO!

I support the mandate for pandemic vaccines.

However, I would not support mandates for non-pandemic vaccines

 

[OscarLevant]

… do you now associate, or have you ever been associated, with people who have not been vaccinated for COVID-19? Tell us their names and addresses …

I recommend a thorough review of Carl Sagan's "Baloney Detection Kit', under the section 'slippery slope logical fallacy'.

 

[OscarLevant]

I can certainly see that argument being made.

As I can also see, requiring a drug injected into your body that the FDA has not approved yet.

FDA EUAs (emergency use authorization) and FDA BLAs (Biologics license application, i.e. 'full FDA approval') are no different in terms of safety . Covid mRNA vaxxes have EUA by the FDA. Therefore, in terms of safety, they are FDA approved, and given 890 million vaccinations so far, the CDC tells us they are effective with rare SAEs. (serious adverse events).

Update: FDA Gives Full Approval to First COVID-19 Vaccine - ACHI

Authors Jennifer Wessel, JD, MPHSenior Policy Analyst and Data Privacy Officer501-526-2244JBWessel@achi.net Elizabeth (Izzy) Montgomery, MPAPolicy Analyst501-526-2244efmontgomery@achi.net Subscribe for Updates Name First Last Email* (Originally published June 21, 2021) Today (Aug. 23), the U.S...

achi.net

 

[Court Jester]

I believe everyone should be vaccinated. I also believe it not anyone else's business to demand proof they are vaccinated. The far better path is outreach and education, and making the vaccines even more readily available and easy to get. Because what is the goal anyway to reach herd immunity? Isn't it like 70%? Being that it does not need to be 100% anyway, then it should be easy make that 70% target through education, access, and possibly other incentives.

Why does the left feel they need to have 100% control and compliance over everything? Why must everything become an exercise in submission?

 

[Linuxcooldude]

LMAO.... No privacy right is being violated by requiring vaccines.. good lord

Sounds like a HIPPA violation to me. The one Congress passed themselves.

 

[Gaius46]

Sounds like a HIPPA violation to me. The one Congress passed themselves.

HIPAA only applies to insurers, clearinghouses and doctors. And even in those cases they can divulge the information with your permission.

An employer requiring proof of vaccination or a negative Covid test in no way violates HIPAA.

 

[Jay59]

The reasonable accommodation has already been made. Get vaccinated (free), or get regular testing. Otherwise that employee can find new employment. What more do you need?

That is no accommodation, hence it is not reasonable. The employer must find a way to accommodate the employee remaining at work.

Are pre-employment physicals legal? Is the right to privacy implicated there?

Not parallel. We are talking about people already working. The differences are significant.

 

[ttwtt78640]

HIPAA only applies to insurers, clearinghouses and doctors. And even in those cases they can divulge the information with your permission.

An employer requiring proof of vaccination or a negative Covid test in no way violates HIPAA.

It will be interesting to see what various public employee unions have to say about this.

 

[Gaius46]

It will be interesting to see what various public employee unions have to say about this.

I’m sure some will push back. Some on NYC already are, though some, like the teacher’s union and onboard with the idea.

 

[BlueTex]

Sounds like a HIPPA violation to me. The one Congress passed themselves.

Only to those who have no idea what/who HIPPA covers...

 

[Gaius46]

Not parallel. We are talking about people already working. The differences are significant.

The fact they’re already working is irrelevant.

But to give another example, some employers that I’ve worked for require a doctor’s note attesting to the fact that the employee can resume work if the employee was out sick more than 3 or 5 days. Is that a privacy violation?

And frankly even if there is a privacy issue it’s mooted by the fact that employers can require vaccination.

 

[Razoo]

Everyone needs to be vaccinated no matter what otherwise COVID 19 and Delta Variant win.

 

[Razoo]

That (bolded above) allows Biden (and Psaki) to assure us that he did not violate his previous promise not to support (impose?) vaccine mandates.

So what he tried to give people a chance to do it on their own. Too many have been led astray by conservatives as in if we kill you so what.