knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 Just now, BigRedBuster said: You and I disagree.....and that's fine. On a personal note. We were required to start masking unvaccinated people on Monday. I lost a key employee because of it. He was an extreme antivaxer and just absolutely got weird the closer this got. No, he's not coming back because he burned all bridges on the way out. So, he can sit at home for a while, while looking for another job. I would have had more of these once the testing started in a couple weeks. Yeah. The mandate would have been painful to enforce for employers across the country. But now we've set a precedent that we can't enforce such a mandate in the future. And when we have another plague, and that one's even more virulent and deadly, this ruling is going to impede necessary steps. Heck, we're still neck deep in Covid problems. Now we're going to have to slog it out even longer, with even longer supply chain issues, longer inflation, longer recovery. 4 Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said: This is in direct contrast to the 1904 Jacobsen case in which the majority wrote: Quote “There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good. On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.” 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Honestly, if it were just the mask part of the mandate. I bet it would still be in place. But, when you put the weekly testing on, that was over the top. The worst part of it was that there was absolutely no way it could have been done. I've had people trying to find tests for the last month and can't find them. Then, you have all of a sudden millions of employees that have to be tested weekly before they can even come to work? That was going to be impossible. THEN, you have the hippa issues around the entire thing where we were having to keep medical records and inform supervisors of people's medical information. The entire thing was extremely poorly thought out and a horribly designed idea. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 6 minutes ago, knapplc said: This is in direct contrast to the 1904 Jacobsen case in which the majority wrote: I'm fine with that. I've been one that has had no problem wearing a mask where asked to and I've been vaccinated since the first day I could get one. But, we have learned some things during this pandemic that shows that many of these mandates are just not enforceable and do more harm towards convincing people to follow along. So, you're fine to allow this to go through when it flies right in the face of hipaa laws? Like the Omaha mask mandate. It might be a good idea. But, there's no way to enforce it. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: So, you're fine to allow this to go through when it flies right in the face of hipaa laws? Pretty sure your business (manufacturing, right?) isn't covered by HIPAA. 1 Link to comment
commando Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 fwiw....the vax mandate did get millions more americans to get vaxxed. i am sure most would agree that is a good thing. it wasn't a failure in that aspect. 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Just now, knapplc said: Pretty sure your business (manufacturing, right?) isn't covered by HIPAA. Ummm...yes it is when we are handling people's medical information. We have an administrator for our health insurance program and she gets medical information in all the time that goes through our insurance. We are VERY regulated by hipaa with that information. If she were to go around telling everyone that Mrs. Jones had a miscarriage...etc. We could be sued big time. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 1 minute ago, commando said: fwiw....the vax mandate did get millions more americans to get vaxxed. i am sure most would agree that is a good thing. it wasn't a failure in that aspect. I believe this was always the goal, and that the mandate the Supremes just shot down was the stick. Problem is, there was no carrot. The Democrats got a bit of what they wanted, but as usual it was handled poorly and the messaging was off-putting. They continue to be their own worst enemy. 2 Link to comment
Jason Sitoke Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 Just now, commando said: fwiw....the vax mandate did get millions more americans to get vaxxed. i am sure most would agree that is a good thing. it wasn't a failure in that aspect. This is a great point, and I honestly think it could have been even more effective had it been tried sooner (Spring of 2021). My issue with this has been that it came too late. You were always gonna have a problem with the truly anti-vax crowd, but the truly hesitant would have been motivated to get jabbed earlier, and that might've saved a lot of lives from the Delta wave last year. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 There was a lot that needed done during the pandemic and still some that needs done. However, I'm a believer that health officials from local communities all the way up to the federal government would put in place mandates or rules that totally didn't make sense. I think it was @teachercd that brings up the fact you have to wear a mask while standing up in a restaurant or bar but once you sit down, you can take it off. WTF??? That's just stupid. Another dumb one was that HS basketball teams couldn't do a jump ball at the beginning of games, but they could then go ahead and play the games. Stupid. In Kansas, wrestlers couldn't shake hands at the end of a match because they might spread the virus. WTF? Sometimes it takes over zealous administrators to be knocked down in this manner for them to stop and actually think about the practicality of what they are asking of the public. 1 Link to comment
Jason Sitoke Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 15 minutes ago, knapplc said: This is in direct contrast to the 1904 Jacobsen case in which the majority wrote: To be fair, I believe the 1905 case dealt with the state's authority to mandate vaccination on its citizens. Whereas I think this decision went against the federal government's discretion through OSHA. Not sure if any state has put forth a sweeping vaccination mandate on all eligible citizens during this, which would require the SCOTUS to either agree or go against the earlier precedent. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 Just now, BigRedBuster said: Ummm...yes it is when we are handling people's medical information. We have an administrator for our health insurance program and she gets medical information in all the time that goes through our insurance. We are VERY regulated by hipaa with that information. If she were to go around telling everyone that Mrs. Jones had a miscarriage...etc. We could be sued big time. I don't think you're covered, unless you work in a different field than I think you do. https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Administrative-Simplification/HIPAA-ACA/AreYouaCoveredEntity https://www.hq-law.com/blog/employment-law/health-privacy-not-protected-by-hipaa-at-work/ 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 5 minutes ago, knapplc said: I don't think you're covered, unless you work in a different field than I think you do. https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Administrative-Simplification/HIPAA-ACA/AreYouaCoveredEntity https://www.hq-law.com/blog/employment-law/health-privacy-not-protected-by-hipaa-at-work/ Dude.....if you don't think I'm covered, then you know more than representatives from my insurance company and every lawyer that's discussed the issue with us. Sorry if you don't believe that. But...... From your link.. Quote HIPAA Only Applies to Healthcare Providers, Which Usually Excludes Employers Covered entities under HIPAA are health plans, health care clearinghouses, and health care providers. Privacy rules established by HIPAA apply ONLY to employers if they somehow operate in one or more of those capacities – as a health plan, a health care clearing house or a self insured health care provider. We are self insured. So, we administer our insurance plan. So, therefore, we would fall under this. 2 Link to comment
Jason Sitoke Posted January 13, 2022 Share Posted January 13, 2022 23 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said: I'm not sure I agree with this in all instances. Presidential Emergency Powers are meant to be exercised in times of national emergency, and by definition expand the discretion of the federal government. Whether you think this pandemic qualified as a worthy emergency, I guess you can argue. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 13, 2022 Author Share Posted January 13, 2022 1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said: Dude.....if you don't think I'm covered, then you know more than representatives from my insurance company and every lawyer that's discussed the issue with us. Sorry if you don't believe that. But...... I'm just reading the guidance on HIPAA. I'm not saying you would have zero liability, but I don't think it's under that very narrow and specific law. Link to comment
Recommended Posts