Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity – Company will be firing me on Jan 5th if I don’t get the shot
Vanity | 11/23/2021 | Me

Posted on 11/23/2021 5:18:44 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012

My (extremely liberal) company in New Jersey has issued a mandate based on Biden’s “vaccine” mandate for companies who are also federal contractors.

The originally deadline was October, but kept getting kicked down the road with delays, and court stays. Now it seems like the Jan 5th deadline is it. If my “vax” card is not loaded into their confidential system by the 4th, I will be terminated with no severance on Jan 5th, after 7+ years of impeccable service and dedication. However there’s more to just not wanting to get the shot. I was approved to move out of state (to a popular state in the south with a great gov), which I uprooted my life and moved to earlier this month, so I will be working remotely, however they are mandating it for remote employees as well.

Here’s the real kicker… I applied for a religious exemption in the late summer and was APPROVED. BUT NOW, HR has said in black and white that my religious exemption is not longer approved… that they can “assume”, but not “determine” that I have strongly held religious beliefs... that is their basis for denial. And that working remotely or getting tested would create “an undue hardship” with my company.

Anyone else getting this same BS from their job? What course of action are you taking? I am NOT going to get this shot, so I am weighing all of my options, including submitting a discrimination complaint with the EEOC, and outing the company to local news sources.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Religion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last
To: WildHighlander57
Card will be real even if the shot goes in the sink and not the arm...

Seriously, where are you going to find somebody in the medical field willing to risk their career (and jail) to do that? And even if you found somebody to do that, how would you know you are not walking into a sting operation?

I would not recommend that path for anybody (faking a vaccine card). Far better to take a principled stand and REFUSE the shots.

81 posted on 11/23/2021 6:31:47 AM PST by SamAdams76 (I am 8 days away from outliving Holly Dunn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Plan ahead.

(sabotage)


82 posted on 11/23/2021 6:37:00 AM PST by logi_cal869 (-cynicus the "concern troll" a/o 10/03/2018 /!i!! &@$%&*(@ -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

When I moved to Michigan, they hit Kansas up, when I moved to Bama, they hit Michigan up. Dunno if it still works that way, but I was able to get unemployment for the couple of weeks I wasnt working during and after my move. I am a skilled tradesman, Im usually not out of work very long.


83 posted on 11/23/2021 6:37:00 AM PST by BudgieRamone (Everybody loves a bonk on the head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

I am too

Their adult children have called me Uncle since I’ve know them


84 posted on 11/23/2021 6:40:13 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: No.6

Absolutely correct! They are now moving to get everyone back in the office.

My solace is knowing that treating people as they are will come back to haunt them and they will pay because it is wrong what they are doing. God is with us.

I am following the lawsuit closely and, thinking on this, I will be contacting Liberty Counsel to get my name added to the lawsuit.


85 posted on 11/23/2021 6:41:33 AM PST by NeverTyranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

We moved from NYS to CA in 2001 after I had been laid off and Hubby got a new job.

NY continued sending me unemployment checks to CA. That was even after I called and told them I didn’t need the checks any more because I found a job in CA. I was told they had never had this happen before and there was no way in the system to stop the checks. (I didn’t believe her; figured she was just lazy.)

In any case, I sent a certified letter to them explaining the situation and never cashed the remaining checks.

I don’t know if this applies to your situation in any way. Also assume every state has different policies.


86 posted on 11/23/2021 6:43:39 AM PST by MayflowerMadam (When government fears the people, there is liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57; ObozoMustGo2012

“You’re now a citizen of that southern state with a popular gov, not the state with that company that went back on their written agreement.”

You are also an employee of the state in which you work. Your home office is your office - company’s remote office. Your employer must abide by the employment rules of that state.

But, like you mentioned, they could choose to revoke or not renew your permission to work remotely. So, it really depends on how the company chooses to move forward. They may decide that it isn’t worth the fight, or they may choose to be a-holes.


87 posted on 11/23/2021 6:45:54 AM PST by throwthebumsout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

“get a lawyer (Liberty Counsel ...)”

Liberty Counsel seems to be very effective. We did some research before deciding to send them financial support.


88 posted on 11/23/2021 6:47:36 AM PST by MayflowerMadam (When government fears the people, there is liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

“get a lawyer (Liberty Counsel ...)”

Liberty Counsel seems to be very effective. We did some research before deciding to send them financial support.


89 posted on 11/23/2021 6:47:44 AM PST by MayflowerMadam (When government fears the people, there is liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Wierd. Did I post that? Because it is exactly my situation.


90 posted on 11/23/2021 6:51:52 AM PST by D Rider ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Page 63: Employees who report to workplaces where no other people are present face no grave danger from occupational exposure to COVID-19 because such exposure requires the presence of other people. For those who work from their homes, or from workplaces where no other people are present (such as remote worksite), the chances of being exposed to SARS-CoV-2 through work activity are negligible. Therefore, OSHA is exempting those workers who do not come into contact with others for work purposes from its grave danger finding as well Thad the scope of the ETS.


91 posted on 11/23/2021 6:57:07 AM PST by VastRWCon (Fake News")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

My wife and son were already let go.


92 posted on 11/23/2021 6:57:47 AM PST by VTenigma (The Democrat party is the party of the mathematically challenged )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48

It is extortion and clearly a violation of the Nuremberg code.


93 posted on 11/23/2021 7:01:14 AM PST by VTenigma (The Democrat party is the party of the mathematically challenged )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76; No.6

Ok, it was a bad idea...


94 posted on 11/23/2021 7:03:10 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: VastRWCon; ObozoMustGo2012

VastRWCon wrote:


Page 63: Employees who report to workplaces where no other people are present face no grave danger from occupational exposure to COVID-19 because such exposure requires the presence of other people. For those who work from their homes, or from workplaces where no other people are present (such as remote worksite), the chances of being exposed to SARS-CoV-2 through work activity are negligible. Therefore, OSHA is exempting those workers who do not come into contact with others for work purposes from its grave danger finding as well Thad the scope of the ETS.

Page 63 of which document; have you a link to it?


95 posted on 11/23/2021 7:06:11 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: VastRWCon

[Therefore, OSHA is exempting those workers who do not come into contact with others for work purposes from its grave danger finding as well Thad the scope of the ETS.]

Unfortunately my company is following the Biden EO for federal contractors. I don’t believe OSHA is part it, they have a seperate mandate push (that is getting challenged in court).


96 posted on 11/23/2021 7:07:16 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Good reading to know that your employer is and does have a team of lawyers looking at their religious exemption policy. While this post is for the employer, we can also learn what exactly they can ask, demand, and require legally before they cross the line. Interestingly, note the very bottom paragraph regarding MOB. Sincerely held religious beliefs is going to quickly become more than just the shot. In some cases they are holding up the mirror for us to look in. Do we and are we following God’s Laws? And if we are not perfect (who is), they can claim one is insincere.

https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/employer-seeking-religious-exemption-vaccine-mandate.html


97 posted on 11/23/2021 7:11:42 AM PST by EBH (Never trust the government or a politician . 1776-2021 May God Save Us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

Currently our company is in a holding pattern as all this crap is tied up in courts. Although if it goes forward it would mean the end of our existence because probably around 50% are vaccinated.

I’ve had the jab, but would go ahead and resign out of principal. No pension to forfeit, just a year earlier than when I had planned to retire.


98 posted on 11/23/2021 7:11:43 AM PST by CodeJockey (Think for yourself. (While it's still legal))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fury
Ignorance is in the eye of the ignorant, Fury. I do my best to deal strictly with reality, not with what I'd like reality to be.

To repeat: The EEOC will do nothing, although I acknowledge that filing a claim is likely a necessary first step even if it's just for show. The bureacracies do have their procedures, you know, and those sacred procedures must be followed.

99 posted on 11/23/2021 7:22:09 AM PST by glennaro (Although I don't believe in "big conspiracies", neither do I believe in "big coincidences")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EBH

I saw that too re: Tylenol, Pepto, etc. They have no proof over what I take, nor is it their business.

Also, religious purity tests are illegal, and probably unconstitutional. It’s akin to putting a pound of bacon in front of a Muslim or a big steak in front of a Hindu and requiring them to prove their faith.


100 posted on 11/23/2021 7:24:59 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson