Jump to content

Yes, Your Employer Can Require You to Be Vaccinated


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's my body and I'll do what I want !   Sounds like a case for the Supreme Court.            

I fired my employer last year.

You can post the headline, one or two teaser paragraphs, a picture, and a link to the original source.   Technically, the above post is in violation of the rule since you didn't provide a li

1 minute ago, Skans said:

Morning Consult.  LOL.  Truly idiotic. Figures you would rely on the NY Times for news.

 

My subscription to the NYTimes ran out just a week or two ago and I have now run out of free articles to read.

I read a bunch of them, but try to guarantee my access to the most reliable.

 

But again, your whole premise was false, so neither here no there.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Skans said:

Morning Consult.  LOL.  Truly idiotic. Figures you would rely on the NY Times for news.

 

Since your claim about the Times was false, perhaps YOU need to find new sources for your reading material as what you are currently reading is giving you false information,, eh?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

My subscription to the NYTimes ran out just a week or two ago

Paying your bills is the solution to that problem. 

2 minutes ago, Scout said:

and I have now run out of free articles to read.

Then, write your own.  Even you can do better than the NY local rag writers.

2 minutes ago, Scout said:

But again, your whole premise was false, so neither here no there.

My premise is valid, supported and as of the present, uncontroverted.  If you want to debate this, then please try - but simply  saying something is false with out any support is a non-starter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Skans said:

Paying your bills is the solution to that problem. 

When one cancels a subscription, one no longer pays.  DUH.

1 minute ago, Skans said:

My premise is valid,

 

No, your premise was false and I posted evidence to demonstrate it.

YOU backed your claims with NO evidence whatsoever.

You see, your writing just meant you wrote falsehoods grammatically well, but they were still false.

Writing quality does NOT contribute to truthfulness at all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Scout said:

When one cancels a subscription, one no longer pays.  DUH.

Well good for you for canceling the local NY Rag.   It's a worthless paper, and I see you came to the same conclusion all on your own.

Quote

No, your premise was false and I posted evidence to demonstrate it.

No you didn't.

Quote

YOU backed your claims with NO evidence whatsoever.

You failed to show how my premise was false - that's on you, not me.

Quote

You see, your writing just meant you wrote falsehoods grammatically well, but they were still false.

My writing was quite accurate.

Quote

Writing quality does NOT contribute to truthfulness at all.

I disagree.  While writing quality is not the only guidepost for veracity, I believe there is a significant correlation between writing quality and truth.  People who spend the time to write well generally spend the time to check out the facts and information they write about.  As opposed to the grunts and farts of someone who can only write their stream-of-conscious in alternating articles and expletives.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Skans said:

No you didn't.

 

Yes, I did.  And since this means you got caught lying again, I didn't read any more of your

writing you claim is so great.  You know, your writing is always going to be considered shit

as long as you keep lying.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

This thread is an epic example of stupid that should be in the Stupid HOF

 

And you don't even know why!!! LMAO

 


When SIX draws a blank on a new lie to tell, he claims it is everybody else's fault.  Typical GOPper, eh?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

Yes, I did.  And since this means you got caught lying again, I didn't read any more of your

writing you claim is so great.  You know, your writing is always going to be considered shit

as long as you keep lying.

 

 No, you did not.  In fact, the only evidence you used, proved what I said about the NY Times was far more truthful than what you claim.  Since you are either too dense or intentionally deceitful (I make no judgement as to which one), let us analyze this in more detail.  You posted a chart to show that the NY Times is ("is", not was, not used to be, not a very long time ago) a credible source.  Here is that chart:

 

5cacf8eec6cc5074332649e6?width=1000&form

 

First, this is only a poll of 1,600 adults.  Second, it only measures the media's credibility among these 1,600 people (who knows where the sample came from).  Third, your study is over 3 years old. 

 

Regardless of the likelihood that the sample size is too small and that the sample comes from large metropolitan areas, such as New York, all three charts show a drastic decrease in adults who find the NY Times credible between 2016 to 2019. Among Republicans, it dropped from 65% to about 31%.  Among all adults it dropped from 65% to about 55%, and was on the decline as the dated study ended.   Even among Democrats, the NY times lost significant credibility.

 

So, I stand by what I originally wrote about the NY Times.  Your chart, your only "evidence" (which I note you failed to analyze, discuss, argue or even mention) proves it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Skans said:

 No, you did not.  In fact, the only evidence you used, proved what I said about the NY Times was far more truthful than what you claim. 

 

Nah.  Seems you can't read graphs either, eh?

Got caught lying again?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

Nah.  Seems you can't read graphs either, eh?

Got caught lying again?

 

"Liar liar Skans", shouts Scout,

with nothing more to write about

the Village knows her story by heart

Debating 'ol Skans with a grunt and a fart

But, no one's believing this Scout, you see

Her well is dry and she's angry the Village believes me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scout said:

When SIX draws a blank on a new lie to tell, he claims it is everybody else's fault.  Typical GOPper, eh?

 

I proved once again that you're a dumbass and don't even know what the hell is going on when you post your stupid face-plant threadfails

 

Keep it up! You're adorable!!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

I thought that it would be a HIPAA for an employer to gain access to one's medical records and therefore verify that one is vaccinated. At least in Nevada... not the case. Higher education and now employers can request proof of this. 

If they gain access without consent it would be a HIPAA violation.  That doesn't happen so it's pretty much a non-issue.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

So if they require it and you present it of your own volition (therefore consent is implied) then no HIPAA violation?

Correct.   It's no different than an employer requiring a drug test or a physical.  They can't force it on you, but if you refuse then they can fire you.   

 

You can fire an employee for any reason as long as it isn't an illegal reason.   Illegal reasons are pretty well defined.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Scout said:

Companies can require workers entering the workplace to be vaccinated against the coronavirus, according to recent U.S. government guidance.

 

=================================================

 

I would like to tell you more from this article which is VERY informative on an issue that we have discussed several times.  But the mgmt. of this chat room will not permit me to post more information without banning me from the room. 

 

Of course they can. If their employees feel differently, there's the door.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crazyhole said:

Correct.   It's no different than an employer requiring a drug test or a physical.  They can't force it on you, but if you refuse then they can fire you.   

 

You can fire an employee for any reason as long as it isn't an illegal reason.   Illegal reasons are pretty well defined.   

they required us to be vaccinated at my place of work. They got around some of the logistics by contracting a private firm to do the vaccinations. So if you registered via the work email and followed through, the information is shared. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

I thought that it would be a HIPAA [violation] for an employer to gain access to one's medical records and therefore verify that one is vaccinated. At least in Nevada... not the case. Higher education and now employers can request proof of this. 

It is.  But, there is nothing that says the Employer can't directly ask an employee or perspective employee to show him their vaccination card.  Of course, there is also nothing that says an employee can't just fabricate such a card and lie to his employer either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BatteryPowered said:

 

Look closely at the graph YOU posted.  Even among Dumborats, all those sources of "news" have lost credibility except NPR...but their audience in minor.

 

The question isn't about losing credibility or that might be pertinent.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...