I’ve heard from a friend that Adobe is issuing an edict to all employees:
~”Get vaccinated or lose your job”.
Since when does an employer get to make personal medical decisions for you and demand that you take an Experimental Gene Therapy that is NOT APPROVED by the FDA? (An “emergency use authorization” is NOT a drug approval.)
Seems to me that a blanket “Everyone get the shot” is “Practicing Medicine Without A Licence”.
Then demanding proof of vaccination is “invasion of privacy”.
Then I’ve just got to ask: Is an Employer “HIPPA Compliant”?
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
HIPAA Security Rule
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) is a federal law that required the creation of national standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient’s consent or knowledge. The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued the HIPAA Privacy Rule to implement the requirements of HIPAA. The HIPAA Security Rule protects a subset of information covered by the Privacy Rule.
If I don’t give my consent, does that put the Employer as violating HIPPA?
Then, if actually fired for wanting my private health information to stay private, can I sue for “Wrongful Termination”?
Then there’s that whole ADA – Americans With Disabilities Act thing.
When I have a tendency to a LOT of allergies and increased immune response, or have arthritis when the shot is known to have more side effect damage in folks with arthritis, and it is likely I’ll “have issues” from a jab: Is that not a “disability” that requires “reasonable accommodation”?
Sure seems to me like Adobe is wide open to $Millions of law suits on a whole lot of different grounds.
So where’s the Class Action Law Suit to shut down this practice? Anyone want to send this to a good Lawfare Firm? Like maybe:
I know one thing: I’ll not be buying any Adobe stock. When you decide to terminate the 25% to 45% of your employees most prone to thinking for themselves and evaluating data critically, your business will not do so well. When you decide to be coercive of employees, you do not get the best of the crop.
From what I have read, that kind of thing has resulted in back downs as employees say hell no as HR departments get “explained” by Legal.
Well there was the recent Methodist Hospital firing of quite a few workers who refused to get vaccinated. They had their court case immediately dismissed.
We live in strange times….
Methodist Hospital in Houston is requiring all of its 26000 workforce to get the shot. ~170 of them are holding out, and around 117 of them filed a lawsuit trying to stop the hospital from forcing them to get it. The judge tossed their suit, saying that their claims that the vaccine is “experimental and dangerous” is false and irrelevant. So apparently even if they can prove that they are indeed experimental and dangerous, the judge for some reason ($$$, perhaps) says that doesn’t matter. Hopefully they can appeal.
I’m lucky in that our company isn’t requiring them, not that it would matter to me. Our location is closing at the end of the year, and my last day is 10/31/21, so if it was required, I could leave now and only be out of about five months pay, since I’ll probably retire once I leave here (I expect I’ll eventually do something part-time just to get out of the house). As I mentioned in another thread, they’re letting us go without masks if we’ve been vaccinated, since the governor has lifted mask mandates for vaccinated people. So if you go maskless, you’re essentially saying that you’ve been vaccinated, and since you’re doing it voluntarily, there’s no HIPPA violation.
Going through VAERS deaths, I noticed that most of the people who have died after taking the shot are older, mostly 65 and older, with a few in their late 40’s and 50’s. Very few are younger than that. Most of the deaths were cardiac related, blood clots, heart attacks, etc. I haven’t looked at other adverse reactions and what ages are affected, so that’s something else to look at, mostly to satisfy my curiosity.
@EMSmith, you have got to watch this interview of Dr.Yeadon, former VP of Pfizer on this RMNA vaccine.
This looks to me to be a disaster created to make money..
A problem with VAERS is that it is subject to the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy. It lists self-reported plus medical personnel reported events subsequent to a vaccination. It will take more in depth study to tease out actual adverse events from spurious ones. Side effects listed for medications suffer the same issue; which is why you will often see symptoms that were the reason for starting a medication being there after being put on it. Add to that the fact that diagnosis, whether in life or listed on a death certificate are guesses subject to error. Educated or scientific they may be; yet still be horridly wrong. Diagnosis is not gnosis. The better your premises and data match reality; the better the decision will be, though still subject to uncertainty.
Apparently Yeadon made the claim the mRNA vaccines would make women infertile. So far, at least, that hasn’t panned out. Here’s an article on that incident …
Late last year, a semi-retired British scientist co-authored a petition to Europe’s medicines regulator. The petitioners made a bold demand: Halt COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials.
Even bolder was their argument for doing so: They speculated, without providing evidence, that the vaccines could cause infertility in women.
@jim 2; I hope you read the entire article that you linked to. I did….pg
pg – yes, I did also.
Robert Barnes J.D. shares a Vaccine Mandate Employee Letter Example. While he can’t proffer legal advice, he wouldn’t share something that doesn’t hold up. Vaccine Mandate Employee Letter Example vivabarneslaw.locals.com/upost/689810/vaccine-mandate-employee-letter-example
Compelling any employee to take any current Covid-19 vaccine violates federal and state law.
First, federal law prohibits any mandate of the Covid-19 vaccines as unlicensed, emergency-use-authorization-only vaccines. Subsection bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) of section 360 of Title 21 of the United States Code, otherwise known as the Emergency Use Authorization section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, demands that everyone give employees the “option to accept or refuse administration” of the Covid-19 vaccine (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/360bbb-3). This right to refuse emergency, experimental vaccines, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947 (http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must “be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision” for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is. The Nuremberg Code prohibited even the military from requiring such experimental vaccines (Doe #1 v. Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (D.D.C. 2003)).
Secondly, demanding employees divulge their personal medical information invades their protected right to privacy, and discriminates against them based on their perceived medical status, in contravention of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (42 USC §12112(a).)
Third, conditioning continued employment upon participating in a medical experiment and demanding disclosure of private, personal medical information, may also create employer liability under other federal and state laws, including HIPAA, FMLA, and applicable state tort law principles, including torts prohibiting and proscribing invasions of privacy and battery. Indeed, any employer mandating a vaccine is liable to their employee for any adverse event suffered by that employee
(https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/faqs#vaccine). The CDC records reports of the adverse events already reported to date concerning the current Covid-19 vaccine (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vaers.html )
A few times today I saw on Twitter some commentary about a recruiter for some oil companies that are already planning to replace their vaxxed employees within 3 years. The point is that they figure the shots will lead to that much carnage.
On the other hand, if you hire replacement employees within the next 3 years, will you be replacing older, very experienced (and expensive) employees with younger ones you can pay less?
The reason I say that is that I know an employee at Walmart who is saying they’re trying to force out their older employees (such as my friend), ostensibly so they can hire replacements for lower pay…and also because new hires will not be entitled to the same retirement benefits as the ones they’re forcing out.
Where is the HIV card? I wanna know>
They should definitely get together and decide if they want this given the precedent it would set.
If they don’t like it, then even if vaxxed, they should say “change this policy by CoB today, or no-one will be in tomorrow”. If they call your bluff, move to Florida :-)
The people who don’t learn history……. One word.
Power Grab – Personally, I would have to see more evidence than just a few comments on the web. There are some web sites I’ve never heard of that repeat the comment, but, for me at least, that just ain’t enough.
@Power Grab: “new hires will not be entitled to the same retirement benefits as the ones they’re forcing out.”
Back in the 1980s I worked for the Albertson grocery chain and saw the same thing. Right before an employee became vested to receive their retirement benefits they would be forced out. Employees who had years and years of superlative reviews and performance would suddenly become (according to management) unsatisfactory. Their schedule would be constantly changed and rotated through shifts. Every possible ding on performance would be counted and scrutinized.
Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.
From the NIH no less. Looks like some parts of the Government, at least, are starting to admit that Ivermectin works. Maybe some M.D.s still have enough moral fiber to feel guilty about the number being killed by “Official Advice” against it and for the experimental injection.
Looks like a pretty good summary / meta study.
It’s unforgivable the government won’t recommend IVM. Trump was so right for the country. Evil Biden/Dimowits is such a stark a contrast. They embody what NOT to do for the country you live in.
I once say a paradigm for classifying people. It looked very useful, but I’ve forgotten the details of it now. It was something like:
All people are like one of these groups:
Miners – extracting value from what is around them.
Farmers – creating new value from growing things (in dirt or in businesses).
Builders – Building up wealth and facilities / structures.
Destroyers – Breaking things and killing. (Such a Soldier who’s job is to “Kill people and break things”. Really.)
Trump was a Builder through and through.
Obama and Biden are Miners – extracting what they can from Government.
BLM, Antifa, increasingly DNC and Dimocrat Mayors & Governors? Destroyers.
Many of the rest of us are trying to be Farmers & Builders in a world increasingly under the control of Miners and Destroyers… IF they win, we all get to start over with rocks and sticks…
Hey! Great news! The vaxx is perfectly safe! So glad that I have seen this video and become educated! (end sarc)
I am surprised they still have comments open. Fun reading them!