Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#851

Post by burntwater »

commandlinefan wrote: post #771
xyzzy21 wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still a choice! If they fire you, that's a better option if you don't believe the vaccines are safe (they have NOT been fully tested - you are a guinea pig in the safety trials if you got the jab), the vaccines have NOT been approved (the lie of the claim otherwise is that no currently available vaccine has been approved - they are all still in EUA - they are still experimental while the "approved" Pfizer vaccin…

That's true - "obey or starve" is strictly still a choice.

It's not a question of "obey or starve," it's a question of "live in and participate in society, or GFTO." If you want to enjoy all the benefits of living in a well governed, well protected society, you're going to have to give up certain things.

If you're not willing to give up certain things that are required to maintain that society, you're welcome to go away. You have that choice.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#852

Post by halfmatthalfcat »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #837
halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll cancel out your vote then because I’m 100% for this.

Just FYI, no amount of coercive mandates and force applied against your fellow human beings to make them take these shots, which are marginally protective against transmission at best , will actually do anything to make you safer from Covid or reduce your paralyzing fear of it. TPTB will continue to menace you with the specter of The Virus as long as it is making you behave in ways useful to them -- namely, by handin…

Oh ok, thanks for the heads up. Can't believe I let all these doctors, medical professionals and scientists cloud my judgement and make me believe them. I should definitely trust a stranger online, believe their conspiratorial drivel on a shadow cabal consolidating power and redpill myself out of this fever dream of a life I've been living.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#853

Post by jasonlaramburu »

xur17 wrote: post #829
jasonlaramburu wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be consensus that the delta wave won't end until the US reaches at least 85% herd immunity (either through vaccination or infection). It's clear from polling that there is a large enough minority of American adults who won't take the vaccine voluntarily (under any circumstances) to achieve this level of immunity, so that leaves infection. Letting covid 'rip' through the remaining unvaccinated populatio…

I'm curious - of the folks that have not gotten vaccinated, do we have an idea of how many haven't gotten it because they strongly do not want to get it, and how many haven't gotten it for other less strong reasons (inability to get time off work, mixed signals from social media, etc)?

I don't know that there is much data specific to the COVID vaccine, but for vaccines in general the overwhelming concern seems to be the (false) perception that vaccines are not safe:

https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/...

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#854

Post by _-david-_ »

sAbakumoff wrote: post #199
the-dude wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think it is different in other countries?

Most EU countries reached high vaccination rate without extreme measures because people here are not poisoned with right wing propaganda.

The young and minorities have some of the highest rates of not being vaccinated. Are those demographics heavily right wing?

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#855

Post by ctrlp »

kbos87 wrote: post #825
ctrlp wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguments for thinking of the burnt-out healthcare professionals are tired and miss the forest for the trees. There are many reasons for healthcare professionals feeling burnt-out that pre-date Covid and were exacerbated by it. Where were your tears for them then? You clearly don't value your liberty. (Maybe you don't even understand what it means, given your mockery.) Liberty refers to your right to govern yourself.…

I value liberty, but I also recognize that there are situations where action (and when needed, mandates) for the good of the collective outweigh individual liberties. Unless you choose to live in the woods disconnected from everything and everyone, you are directly benefitting from the modern and civilized society we live in. If you want to continue participating in and benefitting from it, you'll need to cooperate f…

The trampling of liberty I'm concerned about has to do with the Federal (central) government abrogating constitutionally mandated restraints on the Federal government and taking over powers that by law belong to the States. The 'right' to abortion is far downstream from the Constitution, whether you agree with it or not.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#856

Post by ceejayoz »

ecommerceguy wrote: post #520
ceejayoz wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll run up against OHSA's sovereign immunity pretty fast here.

Are you implying OSHA is 'un-sueable'? https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/23/lawsuit-o...

Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Winning is a different thing.

Sovereign immunity doesn’t prevent the filing of a suit.

The suit was dismissed. https://www.foodprocessing.com/industrynews/2021/meat-worker...

> But, he added, courts have no jurisdiction to force OSHA to take action and “the remedy lies with the Legislature and not the courts.”

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#857

Post by moistrobot »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #845
moistrobot wrote: post #833

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The number of comments here that fall back on some sort of a slippery slope argument, based in a worry about government overreach, is really disheartening. If COVID has proven anything in the US, it's how little control the federal government actually has. They've barely been able to enforce mask mandates. This is by design. We don't want a strong federal government. > The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water…

>Has the government been encouraging people to take vitamin D, get fresh air, exercise, and get to a healthy weight? The government has been advocating for exercise and general health for decades. Despite this, we remain one of the least fit countries in the world. If the government cannot convince someone to take a safe, free shot that might save their lives, how can you reasonably expect them to convince someone to…

Because obesity will kill them. That's the message that's not being said in a COVID context. Healthy at every size is one of the biggest health lies in America

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#858

Post by _-david-_ »

leesalminen wrote: post #414
edot wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m vaccinated, but against this vaccine mandate. My proposed method is this: 1) If you want to get vaccinated, get vaccinated. 2) If you don’t, don’t. 3) If you go to the hospital with a COVID infection, your care is covered by insurance if you are vaccinated. If you are not, your care is not covered by insurance. This allows people to make decisions about their bodies, while also fending off the two main arguments…

To quote our vice-president, "The right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is not negotiable. The right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is their decision, it is their body."

The right of woman to make the decision about injecting a substance into their body is apparently negotiable.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#859

Post by anonfornoreason »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #845
moistrobot wrote: post #833

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The number of comments here that fall back on some sort of a slippery slope argument, based in a worry about government overreach, is really disheartening. If COVID has proven anything in the US, it's how little control the federal government actually has. They've barely been able to enforce mask mandates. This is by design. We don't want a strong federal government. > The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water…

>Has the government been encouraging people to take vitamin D, get fresh air, exercise, and get to a healthy weight? The government has been advocating for exercise and general health for decades. Despite this, we remain one of the least fit countries in the world. If the government cannot convince someone to take a safe, free shot that might save their lives, how can you reasonably expect them to convince someone to…

Government sponsored marketing campaigns do not compare to mandates for vaccines in the workplace. Until the government mandates food quality standards and people start arguing about whether they can buy/sell Doritos or Pepsi in schools, workplaces, as part of foodstamps, etc as part of their freedoms, then it's a false equivalence.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#860

Post by vkou »

anonymouse008 wrote: post #142
vkou wrote: post #133

So, here's the thing. You don't catch an infectious disease through an act of God. You catch it from an act of man. Right now, you have zero recourse if your employer, or your co-workers are creating a dangerous environment. You have no legal standing if your employer's policies are the reason that you catch COVID, which can be financially ruinous - or lethal. Your employer is explicitly protected from any liability…

> So, here's the thing. You don't catch an infectious disease through an act of God. You catch it from an act of man. I think the same but with a different tack. If you get an infectious disease from another person, and that person didn’t want the disease either and wouldn’t want to spread it, then why are they? How do people not know they have Covid and are giving it to their friends, coworkers, etc?

The same reason that people crash their cars. Oftentimes with friends and family inside them.

Sometimes, it's because they did everything they could, within reason, to prevent it.

Sometimes it's because they were reckless, negligent, and should not have been behind the wheel.

We call the first an accident, and the second (if it kills someone) vehicular manslaughter. We litigate to determine which is which.

We also give people leeway in how negligent they want to be. A BAC between 0 and 0.08 is fine... Unless you hit someone - at which point, it will be used against you. A BAC above 0.08 is immediate grounds for arrest, regardless of whether you hurt anyone.

That is what personal responsibility on one end, and enforced social responsibility on the other end looks like. Right now, nobody can be held personally accountable for reckless behaviour with COVID. Either we lift that protection, or we double down on enforcing social responsibility.

Post reply on HN