Coronavirus prep

AnnPT77 wrote: »

kimny72 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

kimny72 wrote: »

cwolfman13 wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

kimny72 wrote: »

The CDC isn't just declaring the science, it is translating the science into public policy.

Most of the pros I listen to say that the risk to a vaccinated person, as things currently stand, is quite small. They are however concerned that if all the vaccinated stop wearing masks, the unvaccinated will too. That means we'll never get to herd immunity and COVID-19 will remain this simmering risk that could mutate into something that breaks through vaccine protection at some point. So they are concerned the CDC jumped the gun. They support the science but aren't sure about the public policy decision.

Community protection comes from herd immunity. And even for a vaccinated person, vaccines aren't 100%, it's herd immunity that covers your butt for that remaining small percentage of risk. IMHO public policy should be crafted to support herd immunity, and I'm not sure the CDC decision did that. Obviously, lots of people disagree with that, and I'm not in charge of anything lol. Just an armchair quarterback hoping we can put this behind us as quickly as possible.

Most stores here switched to "masks recommended" or "we would appreciate all unvaccinated people to wear masks" or something similar. Virginia dropped all occupancy restrictions last week, and masks are only required on public transportation I think. I'd say still well over half the folks at the grocery store are still wearing masks, and we have a halfway decent vaxx rate around here too.

I think they are thinking that it helps encourage vaccination to show that there are benefits -- like no more masks -- to being vaccinated, vs it seeming like nothing changes. Of course those of us who consider the protection a benefit see that as odd, but for the more reluctant folks.

My office is asking people to show their proof of vaccination if you want to go maskless in public spaces.

Yeah, my office is requiring that a copy of your vaccination card be submitted to HR to be considered fully vaccinated. It is required if you want to be able to be maskless at the office; anyone who is maskless in the office and is determined to not be fully vaccinated is subject to a week suspension without pay. Proof of vaccination is also required for personal or business travel without quarantine on return; though international travel regardless of vaccination status still requires quarantine.

We still have several people at the office who are in fact vaccinated fully but refuse to provide a copy of their card to HR. This makes little sense to me...as someone in a high level executive position with access to personnel files, there is way more sensitive information in them than a little card from the NMDOH showing the two dates of your vaccination...that's literally all it shows on the card. Very similar to when a doctors note is required for an extensive (more than 3 days) absence due to illness or a doctor's note clearing someone to return to work after a surgery or something.

Yep, it's just like HR requiring a doctor's note specifying why you need a long absence or some special allowance on site for a medical condition. That note detailing your med condition is kept on file, and probably has far more private info than your covid-19 vaccine card.

Our HR dept is in the corporate office, and their policy is to keep vaccine info at the local office level. So employees are to provide a copy of their card to the GM and he is keeping a list. He says we are 85% vaccinated, which means 6 employees have not provided it and will need to continue to mask. No policy has been announced as to what happens if they don't. I think our GM is hoping it won't be an issue. But two of those employees have told coworkers they are both anti vaxx and anti mask. It will be interesting to see how long the policy goes on and if they are willing to mask the whole time. I also know a couple of high risk coworkers who are vaxxed but will mask on site in an abundance of caution.

FYI we were told that while a company is within it's rights to ask about vaccine and have attendance/behavior policy based on it, we are not allowed to ask interviewees if they are vaccinated, as you are not allowed to discriminate in hiring based on that.

That's interesting. Is it a state thing? There was an interview on a statewide (Michigan) public radio program here recently, with an expert on that area of law. I admit I was only loosely paying attention (I don't have employees 😉), but I was under the impression that employers could make vaccination a condition of employment. I'm not sure whether that was something they could ask about in an interview, or something that would be part of the new-employee intake process and a hard disqualifier to actual hiring (which is how drug tests were, last I knew).

It's possible it is a company policy. They have stations in several states, so maybe it's the requirement in the most stringent place or just being overly cautious about possible lawsuits!

I got curious about this. I think the program I was thinking of may've been US national, NPR's Marketplace, this story:

https://www.marketplace.org/2021/05/28/how-effective-are-employer-vaccine-mandates/

After going down a rabbit hole, I found this guidance document from US EEOC:

https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeo-laws

A key quote is:

K.1. Under the ADA, Title VII, and other federal employment nondiscrimination laws, may an employer require all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19? (5/28/21)

The federal EEO laws do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19, subject to the reasonable accommodation provisions of Title VII and the ADA and other EEO considerations discussed below. These principles apply if an employee gets the vaccine in the community or from the employer.

(As far as I could see, none of the "considerations discussed below" changed the overall tenor. Fundamentally, they deal with things like people with religious objections to vaccinations, and people with a medical condition that prevents their being safely vaccinated. Both of of those classes require "reasonable accommodation", which will be a familiar term to anyone HR-ish, but if others care, it's explained a little bit in the document linked.) Not sure exactly how it fits into hiring, but it's pretty clear that an employer can require vaccination of employees, with limited exceptions.

I know, it seems nutty that I'd look this up. A big chunk of my career involved doing systems support for a large organization's payroll and HR systems, so I'm loosely familiar with a lot of HR stuff. That made me curious about how something like this fit into the picture. 🤷‍♀️ Plus I have a bad tendency to get curious about really any random glittery-seeming thing that wanders into my field of vision sometimes. 😆