New V*cc update says Ford is still pursuing them despite Supreme Court decision. Isn’t this illegal? How can a company do that without even considering remote workers or people who are at wayyyyy less risk (18-50 yr olds that are healthy)? Why doesn’t plant workers and hourly people need them? Something sounds fishy
26 replies (most recent on top)
@2ptx+1eX5beUk - expect for the salaried white collars who are impacted by this haven't been playing that reporting game. Personally, I'd agree that the daily reporting has been in violation, but most people don't find it an egregious invasion of privacy so they don't complain.
No mention at today's town hall. No communication to the employees. No feedback on exemptions.
“ADA prohibits Ford from asking people if they have been sick”
The attestation we have to fill out every day we come in does exactly that. It specifically asks if you have been diagnosed with COVID, have any symptoms, been around anyone who has COVID or if you are participating in a clinical study that includes exposure.
I'm very pro Constitution, since it's the document that established our American federal gov't and defines what powers is has been granted. And that's the point, it's specifically about the gov't and what powers they are granted and which ones they are reminded that they don't have. IE - doesn't apply outside of that context.
However, even if it doesn't apply to Billy's personal piggy bank and legacy machine directly it's a really good example of what should be considered acceptable or not behavior. So when the gov't isn't granted this level of power over the individual it's a bit of a bad idea for a company to try to exert it.
I think a point which is lost in the shouting, is the Supreme Court is not against vaccines or for vaccines. Their role is to determine if laws are legal and have merit and hold to the Constitution. Their decision was you cannot force people to have a vaccine, you can only recommend. You cannot force people to be subject to daily tests, possibly at their cost, you can only ask. There is nothing liberal or conservative about the decision itself - it is a decision if is legal what Biden was trying to do. Court said no.
Funny the salary workers are required but the UAW are not! UAW has to show up every workday but salary pretty much work from home. That sounds like discrimination to a jury panel. Since last year's town halls employees were told they were never coming back to work in the office, or you will not be forced too.
I guess Jeffrey Fieger will have some new friends after 2/11.
So they can't ask me if I've been sick. But they can ask me if I've let the experimental jab into my body?
You don't make sense. I hope you don't work for Ford with that kind of logic.
Alright dummies, let me spell it out for you
ADA prohibits Ford from asking people if they have been sick and to submit proof. They cannot carve out previously infected, irregardless of whether it provides immunity, without breaching ADA rules. If you have a problem with the company policy, you are free to work somewhere else
Palin getting infected twice is evidence that previous infection is not a guarantee of lifetime immunity for all. Regardless of how anyone feels about her politics, she is a person that everyone has heard of who had publicly stated she has been infected twice. It is not a story about somebody's uncle's cousin's friends neighbor that nobody can verify. It sounds like her symptoms were mild the second time and mild symptoms are always good news. The point is, we don't now the long term impact of previous infections. I hope prior infection does provide full immunity or at least enough to prevent severe illness but it is too soo to know for sure. The vaccine trials began over a year and a half ago and so far, adverse reaction has been minimal. The vaccines have not been as robust against Omicron but the percentages of people in hospitals are unvaccinated. If you think the vaccine is untested poison and that people have not benefited from it, you are wrong but go ahead and continue to tell your self you have all the answers
Biden's vaccine-or-test mandate for workers at large businesses will be withdrawn by OSHA tomorrow.
"After evaluating the Court’s decision, OSHA is withdrawing the Vaccination and Testing ETS as an enforceable emergency temporary standard."
"If you believe it is too early to know if the covid vaccine is safe, why don't you believe it is too early to know previous infection provides immunity? "
HOW THE EFF IS THAT THE SAME THING?
Hmm, I had COVID, not sure if the antibodies prevent future infection. vs. Injecting untested poison into your bloodstream that has been shown to cause stroke and heart problems!
Yeah, apples to apples there.
P.S. Palin getting reinfected is anecdotal. Funny how your side screams "trust the science!" until it isn't in your favor.
CDC just released a study of data from New York and California May-November 2021 , published in their January 19 MMWR.
Unvaccinated and had COVID , vaccinated and had COVID, and vaccinated and didn’t have COVID have essentially the same chance of requiring hospitalization from another infection.
If you believe it is too early to know if the covid vaccine is safe, why don't you believe it is too early to know previous infection provides immunity? Previous flu or colds don't provide "forever" immunity. Sarah Palin just announced she has covid for the second time.
I am laughing hard about it. They changed the date for what the 3 or 4th time to your last or 2nd shot must be jan 28th now or have accomadation approved.
Once the boosters are required that is where its going to be silly as he-l and cost ford money tracking or losing employees.
J&j is booster every 2 months and the other two every 5 months.
Ijca - no, I am not confusing anything. Do we give chicken pox vaccines to people already infected? If we did, we might want some idea how those already infected will respond before widespread administration. The same thing with the Covid vaccine. Besides whether or not the vaccine provides immunity, we need to know if there are adverse reactions. With the widespread number of infections prior to vaccine availability, you better have some data on how those people will respond before administering vaccines to them, let alone mandating them. That is science.
1wwy - not sure you understand what a vaccine clinical trial is. The clinical trials test the efficacy if a vaccine not whether previously infected people have immunity. If you disagree with Ford's vaccine policy, that is your opinion but it has nothing to do with how vaccine clinical trials are conducted. You are confusing science and politics.
As stated, clinical trials not only determine if a vaccine provides immunity, but also test for adverse reactions. A previous infection is a group that can potentially have adverse reactions that should be tested prior to administering a vaccine, let alone mandated. The pharmaceutical companies managed to be absolved of liability for the vaccines, despite the many shortcuts taken. Do you think Ford will escape liability for any adverse reactions as a result of their mandate? I am sure we will find out.
1tog - put yourself at the top of the list of stupid posters. Are you under the impression that you are informed? Do you have any idea of how these vaccines function and what the mandate is? Yes, you don't need clinical trials on a person who has immunity for a vaccine that has a purpose of giving immunity. And you don't turn around and mandate that vaccine for that same group. If you are going to mandate that group take the vaccine, you better include them in a clinical trial.
Why would you include people who have recovered from a previous infection in a clinical trial? Clinical trials test whether a vaccine causes an adverse reaction an whether it prevents infection. If you test a vaccine on previously infected people, you would not be able to conclude whether immunity was due to the vaccine or previous infection. I get some people think a vaccine is unnecessary or that some people are against mandates but seriously, some of these posters are just plain stupid.
The clinical trials for these vaccines did not include people recovered from previous infections. Ford HR is forcing a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission on a group that wasn't even part of the clinical trial. Ford HR cannot even provide a data driven explanation for the mandate policy. Err umm it reduces hospitalization and stuff. Really? Just how much does it reduce the risk for a previously recovered under 30 individual of being hospitalized from Omicron?
Sorry but I can't make it make sense. Ford has now clearly laid out that this is their choice, and was all along, after initially trying to hide behind the "it's mandatory for government contractors" facade. Now that real defense contractors have scrapped their mandates, Ford has no choice but to let go of this deception.
The company can set this mandate, however they must also accept the repercussions of their policy, namely the liability due to any vaccine injuries and deaths that this policy will cause, not to mention the bad PR and any lost sales that accompany it.
It makes perfect sense.
Ford HR isn't worried about any long term consequences from these vaccines since they dumped all retirees from health care plan. It doesn't matter if an employee is not at risk from Covid. The important thing is appeasing govt officials and pharmaceutical makers in order to get kickbacks.
OP, you are a du----s. It is no illegal for private employers to require vaccination. Courts have been ruling in favor of private employer mandates.
Companies are free to do whatever they want as far as vax mandates. Employees are free to leave (or get fired) if they don’t get vaxed. From a practical standpoint, Ford wants everyone vaxed to keep down health insurance costs.
If any right wing news outlets get a hold of the Ford HR mandate documents, Ford will hopefully get canceled in social media.