Posted on 04/29/2021 12:03:23 PM PDT by Fitzy_888
(EXCERPT: Frequently asked questions.)
VACCINE RELATED
If I require my employees to take the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of their employment, are adverse reactions to the vaccine recordable?
If you require your employees to be vaccinated as a condition of employment (i.e., for work-related reasons), then any adverse reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine is work-related. The adverse reaction is recordable if it is a new case under 29 CFR 1904.6 and meets one or more of the general recording criteria in 29 CFR 1904.7.
This follows what I’ve read. Informed consent is a requirement for any approved vaccines. I think it’s a form of indemnity for the manufacturer. For instance, I got a tetanus booster a few years ago, and the documentation specifies the common and rare side effects sort of like the commercials you see on TV and hear on radio for pharmaceuticals.
If the current vaccines have no informed consent, as I understand it, you can’t go after the pharmaceutical companies for any effects from a sniffle to death.
Workers Comp premiums are going to skyrocket, perhaps to make up for fewer employees? Who are the largest workers comp insurance provider? Berkshire Hathaway? Another hidden tax for the small businesses!
Well the vaccine companies excused themselves from all liability to begin with - it’s part of their contract.
The Federal Government is liable for Covid vaccine harm, and they aren’t gonna pay a dime to anyone.
Fauci and 5 others share in the patent in Moderna. Fauci’s NIH collaborated with Pfizer and Moderna, possibly others.
Think about it, you’d have to sue the feds and win based on the false information the feds have bought and paid for.
Fauci’s NIH and the CDC et. al. are cranking out false information. If you cite research ‘not approved’ by those agencies, they portray your case as ‘baseless’.
I am very much in agreement that companies should be liable. Why would companies mandate a vaccine (experimental or not) when there is a significant population that has moral and religious objections? That said, vaccine companies should be liable as well! Reagan was wrong on this
Actually you still have to cover work at home employees with workman’s comp.
Nothing should surprise anyone. The Pharma’s are immune from litigation but others are not especially if it is mandated by an employer.
The bottom line is something may be legal but that does not make it moral.
Here a part of a reply to upper management at another company when it was being debated to make the Vexccines mandatory.
“There is a big difference between something being legal and something being moral. You claim (company name) has a right to force vaccination and employees have no legal recourse if that decision is made.
Are you going to pay the medical bills of an employee harmed by the vaccine or care for the family if employee is harmed/killed? What will you do when a person permanently harmed by your forced/coerced vaccination decrees or the friends and family of someone harmed or killed by those decisions decide to take revenge against the company and its employees because they feel they have no other recourse for ‘legal’ justice?
I’d worry specifically about actions against members of the executive management, trustees, board of directors and as well as their family members that made those decisions to put the lives and health of others at risk for profits and somehow believed they could remain untouchable for those decisions.
I think it would be wiser to simply sit this one out. I see no reason to get involved with such a practice as we have been extraordinarily good/lucky at stopping the spread of covid amongst employees. Almost never does an employee test positive during quarantine even if true exposure has occurred!
If there is any attempted coercion let it be the government that is seen at fault to bear the full wrath of the ire.”
H/T to Market Ticker.org
I didn’t think any employer could REQUIRE that a worker submit to experimental medical procedures.
Why? Employer requires you to put your hand on hot stove, are they not accountable for the damage/burns? Why is anyone requiring an experimental vaccine? It’s against the law and against common sense. It’s experimental not approved.
I had read that also at market ticker dot org.
Employer is pushing here so I called the co insurance provider, CIGNA, and asked what happens when an employee gets an experimental injection and has problems(injury, health problems, hospital costs, etc.). CIGNA said “Oh, it is treated as a normal medical problem and coverage is the same as any affliction or disease.”
I said “So voluntarily becoming a lab rat is could be a self-inflicted medical expense for the volunteer. And if the problem is very bad or lasts too long, you get put on disability and eventually let go. I think I’ll pass and stick to the EVMS prophylactic protocol and ivermectin”.
Next I called my primary life insurance provider, MERCER, and asked them the same: Do they cover my death if caused by voluntarily taking an experimental injection? They said yes.
Glad for this OSHA wording though. I’m close to retirement and will not be a lab rat. I’ve been through early polio vax and 3 real pandemics(no masks, no lockdowns) since 1955. Not risking my life or health for it, three friends my age(65+) and health status have had the virus and now have antibodies.
Yes, but at least with an employee at home you have another insurance company that can assume part of the risk. If an employee is working at home and falls down the stairs or catches COVID from the kid who brought it home from school, the WCI carrier will have plenty of leverage to subrogate against the homeowners insurance policy for the claim.
“In some states, an employed person who gets a communicable disease is presumed to have contracted it at work under the state’s workers compensation insurance law.”
Workers’ Comp laws are strange, to say the least. I dealt mostly with Longshore and Harbor Workers Act. I know of a case where some tug boat crew passed around a staph infected towel, all got a staph infection, and workers’ comp had to cover it. I would say, though, that even if a condition is compensable under state workers’ comp law, it would not necessarily be an OSHA recordable. I wouldn’t record it unless if was proved they did contract it at work.
Nope.
Sorry, I was looking for OSHA to do something eminently stupid since that’s the way of things now with alphabet-soup agencies.
“Recommended” effectively becomes “mandatory” once you get into civil courts. If a state government recommends a course of action for employers, any employer who doesn’t follow that recommendation will likely end up on the losing end of any civil lawsuit that comes up down the road.
A civil jury is tasked with determining whether a party in a lawsuit followed a course of action “that someone of ordinary prudence would have followed.” The issue at hand now is that a government “recommendation” completely changes the definition of what someone of ordinary prudence would have done. This means most employers are likely to treat a “recommendation” as a “mandate” just to cover their asses legally.
Different thing.
I was speaking of criminal.
In civil court reality is what ever you can convince the jury it is .
Well, OK — but I can’t think of a single situation where criminal law would ever apply to a government vaccine directive of any kind. You don’t even face criminal charges for refusing to take vaccines that have been well tested over decades, and “required” by the government for years.
Actually consistent with other OSHA regs.
I must say, I am a bit impressed. Mandating a medical treatment that may cause harm as a condition of employment has been in the past treated as workman’s comp.
Case in point. I worked at a plant that used lead. The workers were tested regularly, and were offered a chelating drug if levels were high. However, that drug had some risks, and if the company REQUIRED it, the reactions would be covered under workman’s comp.
In other words, if you require it, you are responsible for it.
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.