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

NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

iapps.courts.state.ny.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 443 posts

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#351

Post by arrosenberg »

ls15 wrote: post #320
arrosenberg wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current Supreme Court is a right wing nightmare, so that sounds like an efficient way to get all the liberals out of government. Hard pass, what is fair about letting unelected judges determine who I get to vote for?

Ok, fair point, but how else can we get politicians to behave better? I don't think that assigning immense powers for four years without personal repercussions for bad actors has worked very well.

Its worked better than literally every other system that has been tried, though money definitely corrupts it. House members are elected every other year and have plenty of power if they want to use it.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#352

Post by noxer »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #230
tlogan wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is important to understand that not all people who against vax mandates are anti-vaxers.

I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree. Vaccines offer some personal protection but predominantly become effective by achieving herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy undermines this goal and weakens the system. Being pro-vaccine is senseless without being in favor of enough people being vaccinated to provide strong immunity, including for those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical complications. Even…

Funny how millions of people who had all the common vaccines except the covid "vaccine" suddenly became anti-vaxer. That like saying someone who smokes cigarettes, pipes and shisha but not cigars must be anti-smoking.

The common western covid "vaccines" do not have the properties of other common vaccines. They are at best comparable to flu shots which I know no one under the age of 50 who has ever took them. Are these all anti-vaxers now too? Have you ever head anyone talk about herd immunity related to flu shots pre-covid? Almost everyone alive today apparently prevented herd immunity for flu most of his life by not taking the flu shot. So we're all anit-vaxers.

>I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree.

You need some more moments I guess, you clearly didn't think this trough.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#353

Post by Vt71fcAqt7 »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #348
Vt71fcAqt7 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think the government can and should regulate food consumption. We already did it with cigarettes and trans fats. Omega-6 fatty acids should be next. A more fair but less politically viable alternative is to tax the healthcare of people with >%30 body fat. But these should probably have 10 year limits with the ultimate goal of changing people's habits.

Ok, you want a big brother to tell you what to do. But why would you bring me into this?

>Ok, you want a big brother to tell you what to do.

More like I want to solve an increasingly unsusatinable cost to society:

>People with obesity experienced a statistically significant twofold increase in average direct healthcare costs per year (EUR 5,934), compared with controls (EUR 2,788) and had statistically significantly higher indirect costs compared to controls. Total healthcare costs for people with obesity and one or more of the 11 comorbidities were 91.7%–342.8% higher than total healthcare costs of the population with obesity but none of the 11 comorbidities.

>Obesity was associated with an increase in both direct and indirect costs. The presence of comorbidities was associated with additional healthcare costs.[0]

[0]https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2022.2053676

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#354

Post by prottog »

Aunche wrote: post #263
db48x wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The city is allowed to fire city employees. The city union disagrees rather strongly with that :) In particular, the city’s contract with these workers does not require them to be vaccinated. If your boss sprung a new rule on you and then fired you for not following it, you would be pretty upset too. Especially if it required you to take actions that you thought were potentially risky to your own personal health an…

>The city union disagrees rather strongly with that Do they? From what I understand these employees aren't being represented by the union. Also, the ruling acknowledges that they did bargain with the union and are therefore not finding a breach of contract. >Having multiple separate orders that result in an unconstitutional outcome is not really different from having a single unconstitutional order. I don’t know why…

Employment (and unemployment) by the city, which is a governmental entity, is held to a higher standard of scrutiny than private employment. It is unconstitutional for the city to fire a city employee based on arbitrary and capricious reasons, just as it would be unconstitutional for the city to impose any other sort of administrative restriction on its citizens on an arbitrary and capricious basis. Would you find it legal for the city to only issue marriage licenses to those who provide proof of vaccination?

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#355

Post by CaptWillard »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #238
rainbowzootsuit wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am perfectly happy to have a COVID spewing firefighter get me to the hospital after a car accident and let me take my chances there, than to be left without a first responder. 100% of the time.

I would rather have a live and vaccinated firefighter take me to the hospital than have to wait at home because an unvaccinated firefighter died of COVID or is hooked up to a vent

Someone healthy enough to be a firefighter has a near-zero chance of being hospitalized because of Covid.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#356

Post by tb_technical »

vkou wrote: post #268
tb_technical wrote: post #73

They took people's livelyhoods away, and now they gotta pay.

When you willingly refuse to get vaccinated, and are thus more likely to catch and spread COVID, shouldn't we make you pay for any lives you've contributed to taking away?

I agree. We should take away all human rights from the unvaccinated, too!

And anyone talking about vaccine problems, they also need to go.

We could make a special disinfo re-education summer camp, where we will send all the plague rats and political dissidents. We'll let them out when they're good people again, and tow the party line!

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#357

Post by tb_technical »

hammock wrote: post #89
tb_technical wrote: post #73

They took people's livelyhoods away, and now they gotta pay.

This idea seems to be exactly the essence of the ruling. Not sure why you're being downvoted.

People were coping and seething while (not actually) working at their FANG jobs.

Later I got voted up from people who got back from (actual) work, who read HN

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#358

Post by prottog »

mcculley wrote: post #325
realjhol wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so vaccines must be required. Very simple. They don't though. None of the vaccines prevent transmission - they were never even tested for that. And only the extremely elderly or obese are in any significant danger of dieing of COVID. If you're not in either of those camps, or have natural immunity the risk is negligible.

> only the extremely elderly or obese are in any significant danger of dieing of COVID We should not make policy decisions as long as only the elderly and otherwise vulnerable are at risk?

Yes, exactly. We shouldn't upend everyone's lives for the sake of the elderly and the feeble. The median age of a Covid-associated death in the US is near the average life expectancy[0]. There's a case to be made that the lockdown-related life loss, including the great increase in deaths of despair, as well as future poverty in children who more or less lost two years of schooling, will exceed the Covid death toll. Our policy response has been madness.

[0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#359

Post by prottog »

Vt71fcAqt7 wrote: post #347
zdragnar wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so vaccines must be required. Very simple. There's a pretty significant difference between "you may not sell dangerous products" and "you must use X medicine". Next up, government mandated pedometers with minimum step counts, broccoli consumption, teeth brushing (prevents heart disease that kills people!), flossing, and minimum hours of sleep per night. Once we've…

I actually think the government can and should regulate food consumption. We already did it with cigarettes and trans fats. Omega-6 fatty acids should be next. A more fair but less politically viable alternative is to tax the healthcare of people with >%30 body fat. But these should probably have 10 year limits with the ultimate goal of changing people's habits.

Sounds like the more reasonable solution is to remove taxpayer funding for healthcare. That way, people who make bad choices wouldn't be subsidized by the public.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#360

Post by prottog »

ghoward wrote: post #280
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your lack of understanding how vaccines work belies your argument. No vaccine prevents transmission . That makes no sense. In order to prevent transmission, your immune system must prevent any infection, regardless of how minor. No vaccine guarantees absolute prevention from infection. Depending on mode of transmission, any infection can be transmissible. Thus any vaccine may not prevent transmission, for anything .…

> No vaccine prevents transmission. Wrong. Some viruses don't get transmitted if the person is not symptomatic, even if there's an infection. Your lack of understanding belies your argument. > Ask yourself what the efficacy would need to be for you to be pro-vax-mandate. I suspect I already know the answer. Well, first of all, the vaccine has to be: * effective, * free of major side effects, * for a virus that kills…

Not just the federal government! All levels of government have limits on their powers. Important in the context of a New York state court ruling.
Post reply on HN