Other Resources The Political Joe » Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement Rss Feed  
Moderators: Ron Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 2
 
 
2013-05-21 7:14 AM
in reply to: Meljoypip

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by Meljoypip

Ok - My point was a lot of these people are sick in the first place because they do not take care of their health. WAY less would get the flu or sick if they ate whole food. They would not like us to pass a law taking away their cokes & pop tarts. How does it make sense to FORCE the flu shot on others? But don't get me wrong, I don't want a ban on pop-tarts. It is the taking away of someone's rights, freedoms, I am concerned with, not the actual flu shot.


But I have an issue with that. Requiring an employee in your service to get a flu shot is not "taking away" their rights. From what I understand, not every healthcare organization requires them. If you don't want to take the shot.. then you need to go work somewhere else. You have the freedom to chose where you work.

I am a teacher. If I post something questionable on FB I can get fired. And there is nothing I can do about it. Is that fair? Anyway, if I choose that profession, I choose the professional requirements of my employer. Otherwise, I go into a different profession or get a job with a different employer.


2013-05-21 7:28 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by Meljoypip

Ok - My point was a lot of these people are sick in the first place because they do not take care of their health. WAY less would get the flu or sick if they ate whole food. They would not like us to pass a law taking away their cokes & pop tarts. How does it make sense to FORCE the flu shot on others? But don't get me wrong, I don't want a ban on pop-tarts. It is the taking away of someone's rights, freedoms, I am concerned with, not the actual flu shot.


But I have an issue with that. Requiring an employee in your service to get a flu shot is not "taking away" their rights. From what I understand, not every healthcare organization requires them. If you don't want to take the shot.. then you need to go work somewhere else. You have the freedom to chose where you work.

I am a teacher. If I post something questionable on FB I can get fired. And there is nothing I can do about it. Is that fair? Anyway, if I choose that profession, I choose the professional requirements of my employer. Otherwise, I go into a different profession or get a job with a different employer.


So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?

Just making sure I'm hearing this right.

2013-05-21 7:37 AM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by Meljoypip

Ok - My point was a lot of these people are sick in the first place because they do not take care of their health. WAY less would get the flu or sick if they ate whole food. They would not like us to pass a law taking away their cokes & pop tarts. How does it make sense to FORCE the flu shot on others? But don't get me wrong, I don't want a ban on pop-tarts. It is the taking away of someone's rights, freedoms, I am concerned with, not the actual flu shot.


But I have an issue with that. Requiring an employee in your service to get a flu shot is not "taking away" their rights. From what I understand, not every healthcare organization requires them. If you don't want to take the shot.. then you need to go work somewhere else. You have the freedom to chose where you work.

I am a teacher. If I post something questionable on FB I can get fired. And there is nothing I can do about it. Is that fair? Anyway, if I choose that profession, I choose the professional requirements of my employer. Otherwise, I go into a different profession or get a job with a different employer.


So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?

Just making sure I'm hearing this right.




What I am saying is that an employee has choices. You are aware that only a quarter of all hospitals require a flu shot..
2013-05-21 7:47 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by Meljoypip

Ok - My point was a lot of these people are sick in the first place because they do not take care of their health. WAY less would get the flu or sick if they ate whole food. They would not like us to pass a law taking away their cokes & pop tarts. How does it make sense to FORCE the flu shot on others? But don't get me wrong, I don't want a ban on pop-tarts. It is the taking away of someone's rights, freedoms, I am concerned with, not the actual flu shot.


But I have an issue with that. Requiring an employee in your service to get a flu shot is not "taking away" their rights. From what I understand, not every healthcare organization requires them. If you don't want to take the shot.. then you need to go work somewhere else. You have the freedom to chose where you work.

I am a teacher. If I post something questionable on FB I can get fired. And there is nothing I can do about it. Is that fair? Anyway, if I choose that profession, I choose the professional requirements of my employer. Otherwise, I go into a different profession or get a job with a different employer.


So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?

Just making sure I'm hearing this right.




What I am saying is that an employee has choices. You are aware that only a quarter of all hospitals require a flu shot..


As I said, I'm torn as to whether a requirement to inject a live or "dead" virus into your body should be able to be a mandate.


2013-05-21 7:58 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.
2013-05-21 8:17 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?

For the purpose of this thread, I honestly don't care what an antibiotic is or how it works as it's not a condition of employment anywhere I'm aware of.

Now, requiring immunizations, on the other hand, are and there is a bill going forward that may very well outlaw that practice and I'm thinking since there are so many ways to avoid it already perhaps this bill might be a good thing to pass so one doesn't have to justify a personal decision and reveal religious convictions to an employer. Come to think of it, the EEOC would have issues with questions about religion by an employer anyway so perhaps this is even more necessary to not allow.

That might have saved about 30 of us from living with typhoid when we found out the "dead" stuff wasn't when we got immunization.



2013-05-21 8:25 AM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?



Well, I brought that up because of your comment:

"So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?"

What did you mean by that? It gave me the impression that you were trying to over dramatize the negatives of the vaccination,
2013-05-21 8:31 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Again, my main point is that if one is concerned so strongly about an employer requirement than that person should take that into consideration when applying for that position.

I feel that a law like that might be unfair to an employer. They should be able to, within reason, set their own guidelines for employment.
2013-05-21 8:37 AM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Veteran
689
500100252525
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?

For the purpose of this thread, I honestly don't care what an antibiotic is or how it works as it's not a condition of employment anywhere I'm aware of.

Now, requiring immunizations, on the other hand, are and there is a bill going forward that may very well outlaw that practice and I'm thinking since there are so many ways to avoid it already perhaps this bill might be a good thing to pass so one doesn't have to justify a personal decision and reveal religious convictions to an employer. Come to think of it, the EEOC would have issues with questions about religion by an employer anyway so perhaps this is even more necessary to not allow.

That might have saved about 30 of us from living with typhoid when we found out the "dead" stuff wasn't when we got immunization.




The polio vaccine is a condition of employment with the military. Along with the flu shot, MMR, and Td. And depending on what country you're getting sent off to, there's a whole lot more they can stick in you.

Will this bill allow anyone stationed at Fort McCoy to refuse their annual flu shot?
2013-05-21 8:41 AM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?



Well, I brought that up because of your comment:

"So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?"

What did you mean by that? It gave me the impression that you were trying to over dramatize the negatives of the vaccination,


I mean exactly that, "So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?"

That's an honest question. Posting on Facebook cannot, in any way, shape or form, alter your body, interfere with your health or cause you missed time if everything does not go exactly right. I'm failing to see how that can possibly be compared to allowing someone to inject you with a virus. I'm also failing to see where I'm dramatizing anything, I'm talking about injecting a virus into your body, much like the bill is, and you're talking about online social pages, which has nothing to do with the bill.

Yes, penicillium is a mold, penicillin is not. Penicillin is made by fermentation of that mold. I still have never read where any employer made a condition of employment taking either of those, so that has not one whit of relevance to this thread. I'm not seeing small pox or polio in this bill either so they're irrelevant as well. Throwing them in to confuse the issue?

From the article, the bill is to make it so a requirement for a flu shot cannot be used as a condition of employment. There's nothing in it about FaceBook, penicillin, small pox, or polio at all.





2013-05-21 8:44 AM
in reply to: kevin_trapp

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by kevin_trapp

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?

For the purpose of this thread, I honestly don't care what an antibiotic is or how it works as it's not a condition of employment anywhere I'm aware of.

Now, requiring immunizations, on the other hand, are and there is a bill going forward that may very well outlaw that practice and I'm thinking since there are so many ways to avoid it already perhaps this bill might be a good thing to pass so one doesn't have to justify a personal decision and reveal religious convictions to an employer. Come to think of it, the EEOC would have issues with questions about religion by an employer anyway so perhaps this is even more necessary to not allow.

That might have saved about 30 of us from living with typhoid when we found out the "dead" stuff wasn't when we got immunization.




The polio vaccine is a condition of employment with the military. Along with the flu shot, MMR, and Td. And depending on what country you're getting sent off to, there's a whole lot more they can stick in you.

Will this bill allow anyone stationed at Fort McCoy to refuse their annual flu shot?


You might want to check with HR but it seems to me the military is not covered by just about any state laws.



2013-05-21 8:59 AM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Master
4728
2000200050010010025
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by Meljoypip

Ok - My point was a lot of these people are sick in the first place because they do not take care of their health. WAY less would get the flu or sick if they ate whole food. They would not like us to pass a law taking away their cokes & pop tarts. How does it make sense to FORCE the flu shot on others? But don't get me wrong, I don't want a ban on pop-tarts. It is the taking away of someone's rights, freedoms, I am concerned with, not the actual flu shot.


But I have an issue with that. Requiring an employee in your service to get a flu shot is not "taking away" their rights. From what I understand, not every healthcare organization requires them. If you don't want to take the shot.. then you need to go work somewhere else. You have the freedom to chose where you work.

I am a teacher. If I post something questionable on FB I can get fired. And there is nothing I can do about it. Is that fair? Anyway, if I choose that profession, I choose the professional requirements of my employer. Otherwise, I go into a different profession or get a job with a different employer.


So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?

Just making sure I'm hearing this right.




What I am saying is that an employee has choices. You are aware that only a quarter of all hospitals require a flu shot..


As I said, I'm torn as to whether a requirement to inject a live or "dead" virus into your body should be able to be a mandate.



For a hospital worker? Absolutely, IMO. Even if the vaccine is not 100% effective, you are building "herd immunity". Your job is putting you in contact with sick / injured people who are far more vulnerable to infection than you are. Part of that job should be preventing the spread of disease, including your own vaccinations.

What about airline pilots / flight attendants? They have to go through security screening EVERY FLIGHT. Should we stop mandating this because they have a scan going through their bodies? The backscatter machines were arguably worse for you than a vaccine.

Yeah I understand most backscatter machines have been removed and they could opt for a patdown (I'm sure some would find that intrusive too, though). But the point is that many jobs have an expectation that you must do certain things to protect the people you are serving. As long as those requirements are spelled out in advance, so you know what you're getting into, I think that's acceptable.
2013-05-21 9:06 AM
in reply to: spudone

User image

Champion
14476
5000500020002000100100100100252525
newport news
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
there is a vaccine that is now required for most students living in college dorms - that wasn't in place even in 2000 when i started school. (i am guessing that it's meningitis but do not remember specifics right now)

for the same reason...many folks, close quarters, enough people died to warrant a response. are these students having their rights taken away from them too!!!!
2013-05-21 9:07 AM
in reply to: spudone

User image

Champion
7619
50002000500100
Plantation
Gold member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
As someone who works in health care I resent someone requiring me to get it. When the H1N2 vaccine came out I got it. We know what causes it and this prevents it. No brainer. The general flu shot is at best a guess of what they think will cause the flu that year ergo the effectiveness rate. I was an employee of a hospital that required we get the shot (and when I signed on it was NOT a requirement and by the time it became a requirement I was in a 2 year contract) OR you could wear a mask at all times during work (If you had an excuse) OR you could be fired. The really stupid thing to me is that they required hospital employed physicians to get the stupid shot (and the marked your ID tag too so stupid and I refused to wear the dumb sticker) BUT they did not require non hospital employed physicians to get it...because they can't NOR can they say OK you can't visit your loved ones in the hospital without a flu shot so there are a LOT of people running around in the building without that so called protection

When I had my own practice I offered it to my employees free of charge but did not get it myself. I do NOT think it should be mandated for health care workers or anyone else.
2013-05-21 9:16 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Veteran
689
500100252525
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by kevin_trapp

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by KateTri1

And yes, that's how the vaccine works. the polio one works that way too.. and so does small pox. Thank God for them.

Penicillin is mold. When you take antibiotics, you inject a type of fungus into your body. And it can save your life.


I'm waiting to see where any of those are a condition of employment. That would be the only reason you would bring them up in this thread, right?

For the purpose of this thread, I honestly don't care what an antibiotic is or how it works as it's not a condition of employment anywhere I'm aware of.

Now, requiring immunizations, on the other hand, are and there is a bill going forward that may very well outlaw that practice and I'm thinking since there are so many ways to avoid it already perhaps this bill might be a good thing to pass so one doesn't have to justify a personal decision and reveal religious convictions to an employer. Come to think of it, the EEOC would have issues with questions about religion by an employer anyway so perhaps this is even more necessary to not allow.

That might have saved about 30 of us from living with typhoid when we found out the "dead" stuff wasn't when we got immunization.




The polio vaccine is a condition of employment with the military. Along with the flu shot, MMR, and Td. And depending on what country you're getting sent off to, there's a whole lot more they can stick in you.

Will this bill allow anyone stationed at Fort McCoy to refuse their annual flu shot?


You might want to check with HR but it seems to me the military is not covered by just about any state laws.




But the flu shot, along with a whole lot of other vaccines, are a condition of military employment. You can get a religious or medical exemption, but without one of those you are absolutely getting the shots. Do you think the military should no longer have the right to vaccinate military personnel?

As for state laws and the military, I agree that the military could care less. But depending on how poorly Representative Jeremy Thiesfeldt writes his bill, it could become a bit of a legal battle for someone who doesn't want the shot. Guess it depends on if he writes it up as a limitation of employers, or as a right of Wisconsin residents.

Edited by kevin_trapp 2013-05-21 9:16 AM
2013-05-21 9:20 AM
in reply to: kevin_trapp

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by kevin_trapp


But the flu shot, along with a whole lot of other vaccines, are a condition of military employment. You can get a religious or medical exemption, but without one of those you are absolutely getting the shots. Do you think the military should no longer have the right to vaccinate military personnel?

As for state laws and the military, I agree that the military could care less. But depending on how poorly Representative Jeremy Thiesfeldt writes his bill, it could become a bit of a legal battle for someone who doesn't want the shot. Guess it depends on if he writes it up as a limitation of employers, or as a right of Wisconsin residents.


I was unaware there was a federal bill on the same subject. Perhaps another thread showing where it was filed might be in order if you get the bill number.

I'm interested in the Wisconsin bill about Wisconsin employers.



2013-05-21 9:46 AM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Veteran
689
500100252525
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by kevin_trapp


But the flu shot, along with a whole lot of other vaccines, are a condition of military employment. You can get a religious or medical exemption, but without one of those you are absolutely getting the shots. Do you think the military should no longer have the right to vaccinate military personnel?

As for state laws and the military, I agree that the military could care less. But depending on how poorly Representative Jeremy Thiesfeldt writes his bill, it could become a bit of a legal battle for someone who doesn't want the shot. Guess it depends on if he writes it up as a limitation of employers, or as a right of Wisconsin residents.


I was unaware there was a federal bill on the same subject. Perhaps another thread showing where it was filed might be in order if you get the bill number.

I'm interested in the Wisconsin bill about Wisconsin employers.




The Wisconsin representative writing the Wisconsin bill is Jeremy Thiesfedlt. If he writes up a bill that states all Wisconsin residents are protected from punishment for refusing the flu shot, then I find it conceivable that at some point someone stationed at Ft. McCoy who doesn't want the shot can refuse the shot based off of state law. But you know what, it's really not a point worth arguing. I'll concede that it probably will never happen and even if it does the military will ultimately win. Or they can just ship the guy off to a base in a different state and tell him to get the shot there.

You say you're torn as to whether employers should be able to require vaccines. You worked for an employer that mandated vaccines as a condition of employment. Do you believe the military should be allowed to require vaccines for their personnel? If the military can do it, why can't hospitals? Or vice versa, if hospitals can't require it, then why would we continue to allow the military to require it?
2013-05-21 12:41 PM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement

Originally posted by DanielG  I mean exactly that, "So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?" That's an honest question. Posting on Facebook cannot, in any way, shape or form, alter your body, interfere with your health or cause you missed time if everything does not go exactly right. I'm failing to see how that can possibly be compared to allowing someone to inject you with a virus.

I was making an analogy. If one is going to see a flu vaccine as life threatening, then it's a poor one. I actually view it as a free service. 

Having to be careful with online posting and equating that with  having to take a preventative vaccine. While I might not like the conditions, if I want to work for that employer, I have to comply. 

And I don't think it's an issue that the government should come in and create a law over. 

2013-05-21 2:22 PM
in reply to: KateTri1

User image

Expert
960
5001001001001002525
Highlands Ranch, CO
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG  I mean exactly that, "So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?" That's an honest question. Posting on Facebook cannot, in any way, shape or form, alter your body, interfere with your health or cause you missed time if everything does not go exactly right. I'm failing to see how that can possibly be compared to allowing someone to inject you with a virus.

I was making an analogy. If one is going to see a flu vaccine as life threatening, then it's a poor one. I actually view it as a free service. 

Having to be careful with online posting and equating that with  having to take a preventative vaccine. While I might not like the conditions, if I want to work for that employer, I have to comply. 

And I don't think it's an issue that the government should come in and create a law over. 




Another analogy. I work in the investment business and if I change jobs, I know I have to take a mandatory drug screen test. So, I can choose to stay in my current job, take the drug test (knowing I'm clean) or find another industry that doesn't consider drug screening as a condition of employment. Both my future employer and the hospital in question is looking to provide a safe environment for other employees as well as its customers.
2013-05-21 2:43 PM
in reply to: sbreaux

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG  I mean exactly that, "So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?" That's an honest question. Posting on Facebook cannot, in any way, shape or form, alter your body, interfere with your health or cause you missed time if everything does not go exactly right. I'm failing to see how that can possibly be compared to allowing someone to inject you with a virus.

I was making an analogy. If one is going to see a flu vaccine as life threatening, then it's a poor one. I actually view it as a free service. 

Having to be careful with online posting and equating that with  having to take a preventative vaccine. While I might not like the conditions, if I want to work for that employer, I have to comply. 

And I don't think it's an issue that the government should come in and create a law over. 




Another analogy. I work in the investment business and if I change jobs, I know I have to take a mandatory drug screen test. So, I can choose to stay in my current job, take the drug test (knowing I'm clean) or find another industry that doesn't consider drug screening as a condition of employment. Both my future employer and the hospital in question is looking to provide a safe environment for other employees as well as its customers.


I see. So you can refuse these drug tests on religious grounds and they cannot fire you, right?
The drug tests inject viruses into your body? It's not just taking an elimination from your body and testing that, right?

It's illegal to ask about religion yet it's legal to require a note from your local Witch Doctor to refuse to be injected with a virus strain that may or may not even be the strain of this year's version of the flu.

2013-05-21 2:45 PM
in reply to: kevin_trapp

User image

Silver member
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by kevin_trapp

Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by kevin_trapp


But the flu shot, along with a whole lot of other vaccines, are a condition of military employment. You can get a religious or medical exemption, but without one of those you are absolutely getting the shots. Do you think the military should no longer have the right to vaccinate military personnel?

As for state laws and the military, I agree that the military could care less. But depending on how poorly Representative Jeremy Thiesfeldt writes his bill, it could become a bit of a legal battle for someone who doesn't want the shot. Guess it depends on if he writes it up as a limitation of employers, or as a right of Wisconsin residents.


I was unaware there was a federal bill on the same subject. Perhaps another thread showing where it was filed might be in order if you get the bill number.

I'm interested in the Wisconsin bill about Wisconsin employers.




The Wisconsin representative writing the Wisconsin bill is Jeremy Thiesfedlt. If he writes up a bill that states all Wisconsin residents are protected from punishment for refusing the flu shot, then I find it conceivable that at some point someone stationed at Ft. McCoy who doesn't want the shot can refuse the shot based off of state law. But you know what, it's really not a point worth arguing. I'll concede that it probably will never happen and even if it does the military will ultimately win. Or they can just ship the guy off to a base in a different state and tell him to get the shot there.

You say you're torn as to whether employers should be able to require vaccines. You worked for an employer that mandated vaccines as a condition of employment. Do you believe the military should be allowed to require vaccines for their personnel? If the military can do it, why can't hospitals? Or vice versa, if hospitals can't require it, then why would we continue to allow the military to require it?


Don't care. This has nothing to do with the military. It has to do with WI businesses and WI employees.

When a bill that affects the military comes up and the people in the military have exactly the same situation as WI employees then it'll matter.



2013-05-21 3:18 PM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Veteran
689
500100252525
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement

Originally posted by DanielG
Originally posted by kevin_trapp
Originally posted by DanielG
Originally posted by kevin_trapp But the flu shot, along with a whole lot of other vaccines, are a condition of military employment. You can get a religious or medical exemption, but without one of those you are absolutely getting the shots. Do you think the military should no longer have the right to vaccinate military personnel? As for state laws and the military, I agree that the military could care less. But depending on how poorly Representative Jeremy Thiesfeldt writes his bill, it could become a bit of a legal battle for someone who doesn't want the shot. Guess it depends on if he writes it up as a limitation of employers, or as a right of Wisconsin residents.
I was unaware there was a federal bill on the same subject. Perhaps another thread showing where it was filed might be in order if you get the bill number. I'm interested in the Wisconsin bill about Wisconsin employers.
The Wisconsin representative writing the Wisconsin bill is Jeremy Thiesfedlt. If he writes up a bill that states all Wisconsin residents are protected from punishment for refusing the flu shot, then I find it conceivable that at some point someone stationed at Ft. McCoy who doesn't want the shot can refuse the shot based off of state law. But you know what, it's really not a point worth arguing. I'll concede that it probably will never happen and even if it does the military will ultimately win. Or they can just ship the guy off to a base in a different state and tell him to get the shot there. You say you're torn as to whether employers should be able to require vaccines. You worked for an employer that mandated vaccines as a condition of employment. Do you believe the military should be allowed to require vaccines for their personnel? If the military can do it, why can't hospitals? Or vice versa, if hospitals can't require it, then why would we continue to allow the military to require it?
Don't care. This has nothing to do with the military. It has to do with WI businesses and WI employees. When a bill that affects the military comes up and the people in the military have exactly the same situation as WI employees then it'll matter.

So you're opposed to an employer requiring flu shots as terms of their employment after a politician takes up the issue, but not until then?  Got it...sort of. 

2013-05-21 3:40 PM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Expert
960
5001001001001002525
Highlands Ranch, CO
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
Originally posted by DanielG

Originally posted by sbreaux

Originally posted by KateTri1

Originally posted by DanielG  I mean exactly that, "So you're equating posting on FB with injecting a virus, killed or not, into your body?" That's an honest question. Posting on Facebook cannot, in any way, shape or form, alter your body, interfere with your health or cause you missed time if everything does not go exactly right. I'm failing to see how that can possibly be compared to allowing someone to inject you with a virus.

I was making an analogy. If one is going to see a flu vaccine as life threatening, then it's a poor one. I actually view it as a free service. 

Having to be careful with online posting and equating that with  having to take a preventative vaccine. While I might not like the conditions, if I want to work for that employer, I have to comply. 

And I don't think it's an issue that the government should come in and create a law over. 




Another analogy. I work in the investment business and if I change jobs, I know I have to take a mandatory drug screen test. So, I can choose to stay in my current job, take the drug test (knowing I'm clean) or find another industry that doesn't consider drug screening as a condition of employment. Both my future employer and the hospital in question is looking to provide a safe environment for other employees as well as its customers.


I see. So you can refuse these drug tests on religious grounds and they cannot fire you, right?
The drug tests inject viruses into your body? It's not just taking an elimination from your body and testing that, right?

It's illegal to ask about religion yet it's legal to require a note from your local Witch Doctor to refuse to be injected with a virus strain that may or may not even be the strain of this year's version of the flu.




Wisconsin employees have every right to look for employment elsewhere if they feel the way you do.
2013-05-21 3:54 PM
in reply to: DanielG

User image

Expert
1951
10005001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement

Originally posted by DanielG http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/wisconsin-bill-would-eli... I figure this one should be an interesting discussion

LMFAO. 

I asked you in my first response what kind of discussion you were looking for. You've now answered the question.

If you only wanted a certain type of response, you should have placed those guidelines in your own OP. 

Next time include an "analogies will be ridiculed clause" so we can know what to expect. Tongue out

2013-05-21 8:40 PM
in reply to: #4749446

User image

Elite
3907
20001000500100100100100
Reno
Subject: RE: Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement
So let me get this straight. A business whose focus is to provide health care to the sick has some rules in place to protect their sick customers from more illness. Then the government now says that work places are not free to determine their own safety policies. How do the "low government" types think this is a good thing? I thought they did not want government involved in our health care at all?
New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Wisconsin bill would eliminate workplace flu-shot requirement Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 2
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Flu shot? Pages: 1 2 3 4

Started by Maks Tri
Views: 2873 Posts: 88

2010-12-09 4:17 PM jmk-brooklyn

I got salmonella from a flu shot

Started by bradword
Views: 1061 Posts: 10

2009-04-30 2:27 PM autigers_1998

Flu shot nonsense...

Started by AcesFull
Views: 649 Posts: 15

2009-04-30 8:52 AM Artemis

Better than a flu shot

Started by TriToy
Views: 659 Posts: 7

2008-10-27 8:51 PM tricrazy

For those who have got the flu shot Pages: 1 2

Started by kellc09
Views: 862 Posts: 39

2007-11-01 7:13 AM DerekL
RELATED ARTICLES
date : March 10, 2013
author : hoffsquared
comments : 0
I was a bit skeptical since regular body wash and shampoos don't really seem to do the trick. But it really works!
 
date : December 19, 2008
author : AMSSM
comments : 0
I just completed my first Ironman season and I was free of injuries. I am now just messing around when I run at a fast pace (for me), I get a shooting pain in my right knee.
date : August 17, 2007
author : EndurancePlanet
comments : 0
37-year-old Bill Fults is an age-group triathlete. But by day he's an Air Flight Paramedic. He also spent the better part of a decade as an Army Ranger.
 
date : August 7, 2007
author : AMSSM
comments : 0
Yesterday I ran 10 miles. At mile 7 it started feeling sore. At mile 9.5 I got a shooting pain and walked the last 1/2 mile. I have a half Ironman to do in a week and a half. What are my chances?
date : February 28, 2005
author : bostic
comments : 0
One of the most important pals a triathlete can have is the gel pack.
 
date : February 13, 2005
author : AMSSM
comments : 1
So how sick is too sick to train? The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine answers just that and many other questions.
date : October 31, 2004
author : tmwelshy
comments : 0
To prevent a mental breakdown before you even get to the starting line, use the winter months to set goals, build your base, vary your workouts, cut back on training and throw in some variety.
 
date : October 10, 2004
author : TSN
comments : 0
Tri-a-new daily read online, with the UK’s independent home of triathlon.