Posted on 09/10/2021 8:39:48 AM PDT by S. D. Waters
For any legal minds out there: If it's illegal for your employer to make having sex with the boss a condition of employment, isn't forcing you to have a medical procedure you don't want also illegal?
They shouldn’t force you to wear clothes to work either.
Most states have what is called "employment at will", meaning that you can be fired for any reason as long as it isn't expressly prohibited by law. Different if you're covered by a union contract. But other than that, that's the general rule.
So, there is a specific law saying that you can't be fired for refusing to have sex with your boss. There isn't a specific law saying you can't be fired
Let me tell you a story.
Years ago, my youngest had a very difficult birth. Spent a lot of time in the NICU, but not only survived but thrived.
That fall, my then boss handed me an itemized list of the cost to the company of my kid’s stay in the NICU. I did not get a raise, and was told “Red, you need a detailed plan on how you are going to pay back the company for what your child just cost us. You should have thought about that before you went ahead with the pregnancy.”
It was on a written piece of paper, with the company letter head, and his (my boss’s) name. Slam dunk case for a number of reasons.
Talked to a few lawyers. TO A MAN they said they would either NOT take it, or that they would charge EXTRA to do so. HIPPA laws, as one honest lawyer said, are there to protect the employer NOT the employee. While I may win, I would never work again. They all agreed the treatment violated the law, but that such things were to be expected.
So I left.
That was 7 years ago and I have no indication that things have changed. So in that case, I was held personally liable for costs to the company for having a child.
God is, however, funny. The same guy who was blasting me later had his kids get type I diabetes. A VERY expensive condition. On the day I left, he gave me one last parting shot on “How much you took advantage of the company.” I asked how much type I diabetes will cost the company, and left.
I’m obligated to congregate with others at work.
Employer knows there’s a high chance that someone will bring a highly contagious, and concerningly lethal, disease to the group - and is understandably worried about being sued should grave harm ensue. Ergo it’s understandable, if annoying and misguided, for an employer to require vaccinations lest someone sue with “you knew contagion was likely present, yet you did nothing and your employee died as a result”.
That’s very different from banging the intern.
Let me try it this way.
The Federal Government has no authority to use OSHA, or regulatory authority, to pressure companies into doing this.
Such power is given only to the individual states.
And — requiring someone to take a treatment that is under Emergency Use Authorization is prohibited; the Dementia Joe cabal said months ago they won’t be enforcing that prohibition until May of 2022.
And — the Emergency Use Authorization cannot require you to take the jab, if you belong to a group which was excluded on Medical grounds from participating in the trials (including the obese (BMI > 30) and those with high blood pressure, and pregnant women.
Trying to make someone take a non-authorized treatment, and discriminating against them on the basis of a health condition, IS a Constitutional violation.
I am not a legal expert but having sex with your boss may help you become Vice President.
I may tolerate vaccination as requirement of employment.
I will not, even if vaccinated, tolerate “papieren, bitte?” enforced by police powers.
Example... WHAT STATE is it?... WHO is interpreting the law?... How long ago did this happen?... Is the DEFENDANT a male or female?... etc, etc.
In most states the simple charge of "have sex with me or get fired" is ILLEGAL. The QUESTIONS in the above paragraph are what can "cloud" the issue when brought to court.
oh... and WHO has the "deepest pockets" and BEST lawyer.
Having seen your photo of the boss, re-write the question: what if your boss asks you to get the vaccination to have sex with her?
Long line out the door of the vaccine clinic ;-0
I did not say that requiring the jab is legal. I do not believe that it is, and I think use of OSHA will be shot down by the courts.
I simply said the argument that sex discrimination laws have anything to do with whether the jab is legal is a bogus argument. This is a distinction that has become lost too often on Free Republic. It is entirely possible to make a crappy argument in support of a position that ultimately is correct, and just because someone points out that the particular argument is crappy doesn't mean that they disagree on the ultimate issue.
If we as conservatives are going to argue against a government action, then it is important that we use good arguments in support of our point rather than bad ones. That's why it is importance to point out bad arguments, even when they are being made by someone on our side.
You’re missing the obvious.
Their power (short of unconstitutional brute force) is “proof by intimidation”.
Acting like the serious, sane, sober, mature, responsible, EDUCATED adults, with all the associated slanders.
All you have to do is to get one or other people to start snickering, and the Karens lose all their scold power.
So saying “let me put this prick in you or you get fired” works; it’s different enough that it suspends the spell while people puzzle it out; then when they do, they can’t help but grin at the joke; and the panic-induced blindness goes away.
COVID shot v Money shot
Discuss
And one of the reasons I answered that is that he specifically asked "legal minds", I'm a lawyer, so I gave him the legal explanation for why his argument was wrong.
Other arguments about why the vaccine mandate is illegal have nothing to do with my post.
It had to do with your prior post to ME, about my post.
Tunnel vision much?
The battle is for hearts and minds.
I recently read a case where employee had sex with owners son and owner demanded she have abortion.
Iirc there was nothing wrong with that...
They’re coming here too.
Well and truly stated! Brilliant in fact.
An equal protection argument might work against the government mandates.
We know that vaccinated people can get sick and transmit disease, because the vaccines are “leaky”. However, the federal government is saying get vaccinated or submit to weekly testing. Because both groups of people (vaccinated and not vaccinated) can transmit the disease, it is not rational to treat these 2 groups of people differently.
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.