absalom01 wrote: “That seems a fairly strong case, particularly in light of the relative risks faced by the younger cohorts now being offered (some might say coerced) the vaccine.”
Fine, but no one is being ‘coerced’ into getting the vaccine. In fact, EEOC/OSHA has stated: “Under the ADA, employers may offer an incentive to employees for voluntarily receiving a vaccine administered by the employer or its agent, but the incentive (which includes both rewards and penalties) cannot be “so substantial as to be coercive.”
I beg to differ, but you’re placing undue emphasis on my admittedly snarky parenthetical remark. But let’s go with that for a minute and see where it leads.
I have two examples, both from California. Here, Cal OSHA has mandated that while offices are “allowed” to return to work, ALL employees must wear masks while indoors until 100% of the staff are vaccinated. The intent is clearly to get people to pressure their colleagues to “just get the jab so we can take these stupid masks off.”
The University of California just announced that any student or faculty who wanted to return to class in person in the fall must be “fully” vaccinated.
Are they holding a gun to anyone’s head? No. Is it a fairly substantial level of pressure? I would say yes. Perhaps the use of the word “coercion” is a bit of hyperbole, but not excessively so.
And in the case of college students, reasonable people can come to different conclusions on the risk/benefit of accepting any of the currently available vaccines.
I’m not anti-vax, and took the Moderna myself when it was offered, and would make the same decision today, even with the additional information contained in the more recent media reports. But exerting undue pressure in this instance is at best morally suspect.