health

Employer vaccine mandates convert some workers, but not all

27 Comments
By MAE ANDERSON and DAVID KOENIG

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.


27 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

It’s fine to refuse the vaccine, and it’s fine if an employer fires you because of it. It’s up to the employer to establish a timeline, and most employers have been fair about it.

-4 ( +7 / -11 )

if an employer fires you because of it

I completely disagree!

The Covid vaccine is a new vaccine and nobody knows the long term effect to your personal health.

Nobody should be forced or threat by losing his job, if he or she doesnt want to put a new thing into his body without any knowledge based on experience for some years.

After a few years of monitoring and experience this new vaccine, we can discuss again about mandatory for this vaccine.

3 ( +14 / -11 )

it’s fine if an employer fires you because of it

I completely disagree!

The Covid vaccine is a new vaccine and nobody knows the long term effect to your personal health.

Nobody should be forced or threat by losing his job, if he or she doesnt want to put a new thing into his body without any knowledge based on experience for some years.

After a few years of monitoring and experience this new vaccine, we can discuss again about mandatory for this vaccine.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Mr. Kapoor the Indian chain restaurant owner can take the two or so refusing the vaccine and move them all together into just one or two restaurants, and proudly post a sign on the door saying workers here are completely unvaccinated welcoming all those unvaccinated public patrons to enter. Nothing wrong with segregation for health purposes.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

The companies are well within their rights by law.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

More importantly, why is the government doing thi?

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Nevertheless Burning Bush, it is the law.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

If staff are willing to put fellow workers and customers health at risk, which by refusing the vaccine they are doing to some degree, then sure... fire them.

No Jab..... No job

No Jab...no college

No Jab...no flight

No Jab......pay full price of covid treatment.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Kipling…nice

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

We literally have a 99% uptake in my company. No one was forced (the 1% haven't made a fuss or tried to convince anyone against it)- We had many active discussions about it. Everybody feels safe, People realize that it's our route back to normality. The anti-vaxxer crowd in Japan is VERY limited and I would go as far to suggest that most of the anti-vaxxer 'influencers' are foreigners deliberately planting disinformation. There a couple of obvious Russians on this website for example and some anarchist type people who aren't just 'anti-vax' but are anti-society in general. The kind of desperate people who stand outside Shibuya Statioon wearing bad clothes and preaching against 'Big Pharma', 'Big Tech' , 'Big Finance' etc etc. We can all imagine that person. Scruffy. probably wearing an old hoodie , Lobe Gauging - sitting their drinking their Oat Milk.

No Jab - Hope your company makes you stay home watching 'bitchute'. Internet Delivery shopping only etc etc. Evil people with nothing better to do than spread lies.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

We shouldn't be too hard on all the un-vaccinated. They are not all the same. There are a tiny, tiny amount who have a genuine medical reason, such as allergies, for not taking the vaccine. Then there are those who are influenced by the non stop false information and outright lies about the vaccines safety and value. And finally there are the "cultists". The ones who make and re-post the false information. Information they often know to be untrue. Conspiracy theorists of one kind or another. Impossible to argue with using logic as they have long abandoned any form of logical thinking. I'm not sure what can be done about them.

Now reading "Recovery from Cults: Help for victims of Psycological and spiritual abuse".

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Mr Kipling:

One group omitted is the “I don’t need to be vaccinated because…” This group usually consists of people who claim they are super healthy and/or claim to have had Covid-19 and are now, in their minds, immune.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

blvzpk....

The delusional? I lump them with the second group... The "misinformed."

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@Monty;

Over 4.5 million people dead of Covid worldwide, more than 700,000 of those in the United States, and you think we still need more time to assess vaccines which have already demonstrated their effectiveness in combating the virus? How many dead do you think there will be in “a few years time” of “monitoring”? I’ll give you a clue - double or triple those numbers, while you pointlessly prevaricate over the comparatively minuscule risks of the vaccines!!!

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

The Covid vaccine is a new vaccine and nobody knows the long term effect to your personal health.

You keep repeating this, but it is still a failed argument, if the science can say with authority that there is no realistic possibility of the vaccine to produce even a fraction of the problems (even in the long term) than COVID already have produced you not believing this has no importance.

It is the same as a smoker saying that maybe in the future science may find that tobacco smoke is actually good for your health, he may believe it so, but scientifically it has no importance, the same as with the COVID vaccines this can be proved with data to be realistically impossible.

So if you agree someone can be forced to act in some way to avoid increasing the risk for others then that applies in both cases, and if you don't then both persons are equally justified in acting as they want.

It would be obvious you hate this comparison, because it makes obvious you have no argument, but it is still valid. The science supports one conclusion so making it the basis for measures is perfectly valid, even if you irrationally refuse to accept it.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The Covid vaccine is a new vaccine and nobody knows the long term effect to your personal health.

Yes! The MSM gives the impression that these vaccines are perfectly safe and effective. But if one actually listens to the experts (e.g. FDA expert panel discussion) one realizes that the vaccines do pose some risks, there are many unknowns, there is a scarcity of safety data, and we should each consider the risk benefit ratio.

More importantly, why is the government doing this?

Yes! What worries me much more than the virus is how much the governments are pushing these vaccines while blocking safe and effective early treatments, and how the MSM and big net is going along with it.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Yes! The MSM gives the impression that these vaccines are perfectly safe and effective.

False, the ones trying to misrepresent the actual message in the media and by the experts are the antivaxxers, in reality the actual argument is that the vaccine is simply much safer than the infection. But since the antivaxxers can't do anything against this very obvious conclussions they make every effort possible to lie and misrepresent what is actually being told.

The vaccines have much more data to prove their safety than what is available for COVID, that does not change just because people refuse to accept it, it only shows how some people are choosing to live in denial.

Yes! What worries me much more than the virus is how much the governments are pushing these vaccines while blocking safe and effective early treatments

The answer is simple, nobody is blocking safe and effective treatments, only those that have demonstrated to be no better than doing nothing, this is the scientific consensus, there is no meaning (outside of invalid populist appeals to be "doing something") for any government to support something that do not work and have risks on its own.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"Employer vaccine mandates convert some workers, but not all"

Nice to see some people will not let others bully them.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Non-smokers don’t have an “irrational fear of tobacco” and unvaccinated don’t have an irrational fear of vaccine.

That is a false equivalence, science can prove not smoking bring benefits to the health, but in the case of vaccines it is vaccinating the option that is correlated with better health.

The part where a decision is irrational or not comes if the person can accept valid objective scientific evidence.

If a person can accept smoking is worse for his health not smoking would be the rational decision.

If a person can accept not vaccinating is worse for his health then vaccinating would be the rational decision.

"Keeping the body pure" is just the excuse some people use to pretend their decision is rational when it can be proved the opposite.

Nice to see some people will not let others bully them.

Strangely this is only about things that let you act as you personally want. Do you think it is nice also that smokers do not let other bully them into stopping their habit at public spaces?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Bush,

Totally illogical. if you are not vaccinated you are 11x more likely to get COVID. COVID will ruin your desire for purity as you struggle to breath in an intensive care unit.

Your analogy is flawed as well, no one chooses to get COVID like someone can choose to smoke or not. Your analogy does hold in that smokers inflict their disease on others as do infected COVID people do as well to those around them.

Millions of people all over the world have been vaccinated and the data is irrefutable at this point. Vaccines for COVID are safe and effective. It is the non-vaccinated that are getting sick for the more part and are the ones dying from the virus. This is a clear case where the government has to force people to do the right thing for themselves and others as they are too stupid to do so on their own, like wearing safety belts in cars for example. Many purity lovers objected to that when the law was introduced forcing people to comply. That law saved thousands of lives.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

You would deny yourself a blood transfusion if you required or an emergency vaccination in an ER?

If that blood were made from parts harvested from aborted babies, then, yes, I imagine that quite a number of people would refuse to pollute themselves with it, even in dire emergencies.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Non-smokers don’t have an “irrational fear of tobacco” and unvaccinated don’t have an irrational fear of vaccine.

Yes, very rational to want to keep your body healthy.

Your analogy is flawed as well, no one chooses to get COVID like someone can choose to smoke or not. 

But you choose whether to get the vax or not.

The part where a decision is irrational or not comes if the person can accept valid objective scientific evidence.

Naah, not getting the vax is "irrational" based on very selective evidence.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites