Posted on 10/08/2021 11:05:07 AM PDT by RBW in PA
This pattern of reegulation was used by the states last year ... the governor delegates emegency power or whatever to a task force, and the task forsce issues the rules. Then the governor users her flying monkeys to enforce the rules made by unaccountable task force.
Safer Federal Workforce Task Force
https://www.saferfederalworkforce.gov/
https://www.saferfederalworkforce.gov/downloads/Draft%20contractor%20guidance%20doc_20210922.pdf
Page 5 of the DRAFT guidance has a vaccine mandate
Covered contractors must ensure that all covered contractor employees are fully vaccinated for COVID-19, unless the employee is legally entitled to an accommodation. Covered contractor employees must be fully vaccinated no later than December 8, 2021. After that date, all covered contractor employees must be fully vaccinated by the first day of the period of performance on a newly awarded covered contract, and by the first day of the period of performance on an exercised option or extended or renewed contract when the clause has been incorporated into the covered contract.
A covered contractor may be required to provide an accommodation to covered contractor employees who communicate to the covered contractor that they are not vaccinated against COVID-19 because of a disability (which would include medical conditions) or because of a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. A covered contractor should review and consider what, if any, accommodation it must offer. Requests for amedical accommodationa or amedical exceptionsa should be treated as requests for a disability accommodation.
Should a Federal agency have an urgent, mission-critical need for a covered contractor to have covered contractor employees begin work on a covered contract or at a covered workplace before becoming fully vaccinated, the agency head may approve an exception for the covered contractorain the case of such limited exceptions, the covered contractor must ensure these covered contractor employees are fully vaccinated within 60 days of beginning work on a covered contract or at a covered workplace. The covered contractor must further ensure that such employees comply with masking and physical distancing requirements for not fully vaccinated individuals in covered workplaces prior to being fully vaccinated.
Not all contractors are bound by this language. Only contractors for services.
Like all government, this crap is deliberately Byzantine. Employment for enforcement minions and lawyers all around.
They stuck a fine in the infrastructure bill but it isn’t law yet.
At present, on what basis, on what incentive are they requiring the shots?
Threats of government fines without any implementing rules or legislation?
There’s no OSHA rule or legislation making the mandates and fines effective as of xx date.
What exactly are they going on, to order people to get a medication administered?
Right now, all the formal pressure is coming from companies, with the excemption, I think, of armed forces who can be directly ordered.
The formal pressure from the government will come via task force or similar insulated unaccountable entities.
I expect the courts will uphold the tyranny. It’s a small tyranny, and it’s for your own good, and public health depends on you being forced to act against your will.
Unfortunately, none of this really matters. The fed has done all they needed to to give companies the excuse to implement the requirement on their own. Pretty soon if you are unvaccinated you will not be able to have a job with any larger company.
I still don’t see exactly what mechanisms are being used, absent legislation and OSHA rules in place, that is enough for companies with > 100 employees to mandate the shots.
I just can’t see what it is; —where— is the pressure coming from that is being exerted on corporations?
Why aren’t companies telling hidenbiden and his handlers to stuff it?
Related:
Which companies/states are denying unemployment benefits for those who would or could not get the shots?
They are run by Karens, and generally, company culture is pathologically risk averse.
Even without talk of a government rule, I guarantee companies were pondering and certainly not opposed to mandatory vaccine. They anticipate the possibility of an infected employee suing for negligence for not mandating vaccines, or whatever shortcoming.
Company management LOVES to be told what to do - they love government mandates. It creates a more predictable environment. At most they complain,put on a good show. But risk aversion. As long as they can say "we have no control over this, and we have followed every single rule" they feel they have a perfect out.
They are trying to bluff everyone. That has worked well. Plus these actions give cover to big fascist/PC minded firms to force vaccine mandates.
A majority of companies are very poorly run -- there are far more people who want to be CEO than are actually any good at it. And a lot of the rest of the management chain does little more than forward emails.
When they have too many worker it is easy to lay off some. But when they don't have enough it takes creativity and making tough decisions to deal with that. When there is some other challenge, they are just seeking the path of least resistance, even if it makes things worse for the company. And most of them have been infested with woke. Nothing they do makes any sense.
This is where is pays to go to work for smaller companies that are far less tied to national politics and are either well run or short lived.
And any company that does business with the federal government simply has no reason at all to be competent or honest.
Ok plain question, need answer:
Are the companies adding “must get the shots” to their company policy, and using that as justification for firing refusrrs?
Yes.
The policy must have exceptions on paper, for medical and religious objectors.
Cboldt wrote:
“
— Are the companies adding “must get the shots” to their company policy, and using that as justification for firing refusrrs? —
Yes.
The policy must have exceptions on paper, for medical and religious objectors.”
What recourse does an employee have, if the exceptions are denied?
Contact the Liberty Counsel. I heard they are suing to delay the EO on federal employees. Www.lc.org
Assuming there is no appeal to management, civil lawsuit is the only recourse I can think of, other than finding different work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.