Coronavirus

[Lilbaz]

The point is you said you wouldn't want to pay sick pay for someone who 'made bad choices'.
You may have an employee in their, say, mid-50s who has to have chemotherapy and that might mean you have to grant sick pay. I just want to check whether if you knew a person had certain 'life choices' whether you'd hesitate to employ them due to the time off work they'd need in periods of sickness, treatment etc.

Instead of chain smoker, i could say:

- serial philanderer/dogging expert (treatment for HIV or other STDs)
- drug and/alcohol abuse (heart/cardiovascular issues - i mean they could drop dead on the job!)
- chain smoker again (COPD, risk of constant pneumonia infections)

Sorry can you please quote my post where i said i wouldn't employ people that made 'bad choices'?

 

[glorygloryeze]

I find it a contradiction to say you can't go to the pub because you haven't had the jab but if you have you can thus drinking yourself into oblivion. Haha

Yes, well this thing has stopped being about 'public health' a long time ago...

 

[glorygloryeze]

Sorry can you please quote my post where i said i wouldn't employ people that made 'bad choices'?

You said you wouldn't pay sick pay of those who made 'bad choices' in not getting jabbed. My inference therefore was that you'd also not employ said people (or at least not employ said people over those who did get jabbed).

Happy for you to clarify

 

[glorygloryeze]

Bit of both and also the smell of their farting.

Fair enough

 

[Lilbaz]

You said you wouldn't pay sick pay of those who made 'bad choices' in not getting jabbed. My inference therefore was that you'd also not employ said people (or at least not employ said people over those who did get jabbed).

Happy for you to clarify

You are quoting 'bad choices', quote the post. I remember saying selfish lazy tacos for not getting vaccinated. Don't remember saying bad choices. I might be wrong. Quote me and we'll discuss.

 

[glorygloryeze]

You are quoting 'bad choices', quote the post. I remember saying selfish lazy tacos for not getting vaccinated. Don't remember saying bad choices. I might be wrong. Quote me and we'll discuss.

I equated "selfish lazy tacos" as those you/anyone could label as people who made 'bad choices'.
I introduced the term and description to align with yours.
Again, happy for you to clarify how my phrase is different to yours in the contact of what we';re talking about

 

[Lilbaz]

I equated "selfish lazy tacos" as those you/anyone could label as people who made 'bad choices'.
I introduced the term and description to align with yours.
Again, happy for you to clarify how my phrase is different to yours in the contact of what we';re talking about

So you equate things (make them up) then put them in quotations?

Ok.

To clarify, it takes almost zero effort to get vaccinated. If you don't want to put that minimal effort in to protect yourself and those around you then i have no time for you. Employers should be allowed to let them go if they wished. If not fair enough.

 

[Grays_1890]

So you equate things (make them up) then put them in quotations?

Ok.

To clarify, it takes almost zero effort to get vaccinated. If you don't want to put that minimal effort in to protect yourself and those around you then i have no time for you. Employers should be allowed to let them go if they wished. If not fair enough.

I find it slightly a case of too much info is a dangerous thing. I don't wanna live in a society where we know that about each other and finger point or discriminate, I also think it's a personal choice and also medical privacy like anything else.

 

[Lilbaz]

I find it slightly a case of too much info is a dangerous thing. I don't wanna live in a society where we know that about each other and finger point or discriminate, I also think it's a personal choice and also medical privacy like anything else.

It's a personal choice, you can have the vaccine or not. Just you won't be able to do certain things. It's not medical privacy either. Even though most workplaces will ask you about medical problems at an interview. It's about whether you've been vaccinated or not.

 

[glorygloryeze]

So you equate things (make them up) then put them in quotations?

Ok.

To clarify, it takes almost zero effort to get vaccinated. If you don't want to put that minimal effort in to protect yourself and those around you then i have no time for you. Employers should be allowed to let them go if they wished. If not fair enough.

The quotations were mine to highlight my new definition. I didn't actually say you wrote that i just referred to it as a new summarized definition in the context of what we were discussing.

I would also say it takes zero effort not to binge-drink, smoke (certainly in the last 30 years given all the warnings etc), take drugs etc. Once you start making judgments on how someone's health is and whether that relates to choices they make or have made you go down a slippery slope that opens the door to the abuse of medical confidentiality (can you imagine health insurance policies if such things are know for example).
Plus how do you know if someone hasn't been vaccinated because of medical reasons that they ant to keep private?
As i say, slippery slope for such a disease...

 

[glorygloryeze]

It's a personal choice, you can have the vaccine or not. Just you won't be able to do certain things. It's not medical privacy either. Even though most workplaces will ask you about medical problems at an interview. It's about whether you've been vaccinated or not.

And said vaccination doesn't stop your worker contracting it or spreading it so...

 

[Lilbaz]

The quotations were mine to highlight my new definition. I didn't actually say you wrote that i just referred to it as a new summarized definition in the context of what we were discussing.

I would also say it takes zero effort not to binge-drink, smoke (certainly in the last 30 years given all the warnings etc), take drugs etc. Once you start making judgments on how someone's health is and whether that relates to choices they make or have made you go down a slippery slope that opens the door to the abuse of medical confidentiality (can you imagine health insurance policies if such things are know for example).
Plus how do you know if someone hasn't been vaccinated because of medical reasons that they ant to keep private?
As i say, slippery slope for such a disease...

If someone was binge drinking or smoking at work, fine you should be able to sack them too. In fact i think you are allowed.

 

[glorygloryeze]

If someone was binge drinki g or smoking at work, fine you should be able to sack them too. In fact i think you are allowed.

I get that, i'm talking more about doing such things outside of work but the effects on the individual having effects on their working capabilities when they are working

 

[Glenda's Legs]

It's a personal choice, you can have the vaccine or not. Just you won't be able to do certain things. It's not medical privacy either. Even though most workplaces will ask you about medical problems at an interview. It's about whether you've been vaccinated or not.

There are a lot of people who have genuine concerns about taking the vaccine - I don't mean anti-vaxxers, I couldn't care less what happens to them - but individuals who are worried about side effects, or who have a distrust of the vaccine. I believe a not insignificant number of non-vaccinated are in ethnic minority populations. A policy which would allow employers to dismiss unvaccinated staff (with full redundancy/PILON?) is going to be discriminatory and open to abuse by unscrupulous employers.
Efforts would be better spent educating and encouraging vaccine uptake.

 

[Grays_1890]

There are a lot of people who have genuine concerns about taking the vaccine - I don't mean anti-vaxxers, I couldn't care less what happens to them - but individuals who are worried about side effects, or who have a distrust of the vaccine. I believe a not insignificant number of non-vaccinated are in ethnic minority populations. A policy which would allow employers to dismiss unvaccinated staff (with full redundancy/PILON?) is going to be discriminatory and open to abuse by unscrupulous employers.
Efforts would be better spent educating and encouraging vaccine uptake.

Exactly this. I can't give too much away but I've worked as a protocols manager in sport and film over the last 8 month and the PL is one of our clients, spoken to some players and the reason the uptake is so low is because they are literally in many cases hugely analytical of what goes in their bodies, many use DNA testing companies as an example to examine hereditary issues, food issues, potential illness threats etc so for them they have weighed up risk. Many have had Covid and recovered fully, many have seen colleagues have it and recover fully so for them they in some cases don't want to put in their bodies what might even in small cases have an adverse affect.

 

[Lilbaz]

There are a lot of people who have genuine concerns about taking the vaccine - I don't mean anti-vaxxers, I couldn't care less what happens to them - but individuals who are worried about side effects, or who have a distrust of the vaccine. I believe a not insignificant number of non-vaccinated are in ethnic minority populations. A policy which would allow employers to dismiss unvaccinated staff (with full redundancy/PILON?) is going to be discriminatory and open to abuse by unscrupulous employers.
Efforts would be better spent educating and encouraging vaccine uptake.

Then they should speak to their doctor. If their doctor shares their concrens fair enough. If not sorry, doesn't matter what colour your skin is.

I am not saying all employers should sack or not hire unvaccinated people. I am saying they should have the choice.

 

[glorygloryeze]

There are a lot of people who have genuine concerns about taking the vaccine - I don't mean anti-vaxxers, I couldn't care less what happens to them - but individuals who are worried about side effects, or who have a distrust of the vaccine. I believe a not insignificant number of non-vaccinated are in ethnic minority populations. A policy which would allow employers to dismiss unvaccinated staff (with full redundancy/PILON?) is going to be discriminatory and open to abuse by unscrupulous employers.
Efforts would be better spent educating and encouraging vaccine uptake.

One of the very worst things for me about this pandemic situation is the conflation of labelling of those who are against every vaccination period and those who have genuine concerns about this particular group coronavirus vaccines which are novel in so many ways and which has not undergone the same rigourous testing that other vaccines and medications usually do.
Imagine having had all the usual vaccines but not wanting to have this one and then being labelled an 'anti-vaxxer'!

Even those who have suffered very bad reactions to a first dose and decide against having another and/or warning family members, friends etc are being labelled 'anti-vaxxers' , which is actually obscene

 

[thfcsteff]

There are a lot of people who have genuine concerns about taking the vaccine - I don't mean anti-vaxxers, I couldn't care less what happens to them - but individuals who are worried about side effects, or who have a distrust of the vaccine. I believe a not insignificant number of non-vaccinated are in ethnic minority populations. A policy which would allow employers to dismiss unvaccinated staff (with full redundancy/PILON?) is going to be discriminatory and open to abuse by unscrupulous employers.
Efforts would be better spent educating and encouraging vaccine uptake.

Misinformation is a massive, massive issue.

I think there needs to be a bigger campaign to remind people how many vaccines they have taken in their lives already.

 

[thfcsteff]

One of the very worst things for me about this pandemic situation is the conflation of labelling of those who are against every vaccination period and those who have genuine concerns about this particular group coronavirus vaccines which are novel in so many ways and which has not undergone the same rigourous testing that other vaccines and medications usually do.
Imagine having had all the usual vaccines but not wanting to have this one and then being labelled an 'anti-vaxxer'!

Even those who have suffered very bad reactions to a first dose and decide against having another and/or warning family members, friends etc are being labelled 'anti-vaxxers' , which is actually obscene

I'd love to see the data on who suffered bad reactions to vaccine percentage-wise. I know they're out there, but in terms of proportion and percentage, what are the figures?

 

[Grays_1890]

I'd love to see the data on who suffered bad reactions to vaccine percentage-wise. I know they're out there, but in terms of proportion and percentage, what are the figures?

I think you can pick it up from Gov website, isn't it the Yellow card data?