Flying and federal laws

[Reynolds]

By "anti-covid-vaxers" I mean those who are opposed to the vaccinations (like those who prevented people who wanted vaccinations from getting them in Atlanta). I do not mean simply declining vaccinations.

I am also against forcing people to get vaccinated.

But historically businesses themselves had the right to require vaccines as a condition of employment (most often with the influenza vaccine). I do not find it reasonable to strip this freedom from employers just because some reject the science behind a couple of vaccines.

When we start removing rights to deal with a situation we open up a can of worms for the future.

John, you have become adept at peeing on people and attempting to convince them it's raining.

 

[JonC]

You are confused. You advocate tyrany and try to convince everyone that it is liberty.

Uh....no. Now you are misleading.

Here is what I advocate:

1. No forced vaccinations.
2. People decide their own health care.
3. We leave the freedoms employers have had regarding vaccinations alone. Don't start stripping freedom.

How is that "tyrany????

I'm saying let men continue to have the freedoms we have traditionally had.

YOU are the one trying to take away a freedom because it does not suit you. That is wrong.

Employers have, historically, been able to require vaccinations as a condition of employment. YOU are wanting to remove this freedom.

 

[JonC]

John, you have become adept at peeing on people and attempting to convince them it's raining.

No. But I am at medical waiting to pee (mercury program).

Let's clear this up right now.

Be honest - do you think employers should or should not be able to require vaccinations as a condition of employment?

 

[Two Wings]

Check out Twitter sometime.

I did. when they started with the censorship last year, I dumped 'em. Ditto Faceybook. It was making relationships with extended family quite caustic.

It's a challenge and I routinely fail to meet the challenge ... but I like to think that at some point, I'll realize I've done a header in my relationship with a brother and seek reconciliation so that "cess pool" isn't the only descriptor but perhaps also "pump tank" where the clear water is located (I have an aerobic septic system; aka 'on-site-wastewater-treatment-facility)

 

[Reynolds]

Uh....no. Now you are misleading.

Here is what I advocate:

1. No forced vaccinations.
2. People decide their own health care.
3. We leave the freedoms employers have had regarding vaccinations alone. Don't start stripping freedom.

How is that "tyrany????

I'm saying let men continue to have the freedoms we have traditionally had.

YOU are the one trying to take away a freedom because it does not suit you. That is wrong.

Employers have, historically, been able to require vaccinations as a condition of employment. YOU are wanting to remove this freedom.

Employers have not had the right to force flu shots, not in Ga anyway. We dealt with that in the early 90s at the county I worked for. We, the opposition won. County attorney told administrator that the proponderance of legal precidentv was against him.
You advocate choice by force!

 

[Two Wings]

Be honest - do you think employers should or should not be able to require vaccinations as a condition of employment?

not without being held responsible for adverse reactions.

 

[JonC]

I asked this question before ... If there was a response, I missed it.

when a mandate of such is in place, particularly after staff were hired BEFORE (in some cases WELL before), why shouldn't the entity requiring the mandate be responsible for their decision?

I used the competing right of a private property owner to prohibit the presence of firearms ... to a citizens right to keep and bear arms. It is reasonable the property owner making that decision should therefore be liable for the security of those who properly access the property.

So ... if the government is going to mandate this cv jab ... or a private business is going to mandate this cv jab ... they must be liable for that decision. It is a change to the status quo (big legal deal to be in business).

And this is before we even wade back into the waters of the real dangers of this cv vax as evidenced by the government's own data system.

Do you think a private business should be liable for adverse reactions to a mandate requiring the cv jab? If not, why not?

Here is my opinion - we should keep our rights as they are.

Historically an employer can mandate vaccines as a condition of employment. If the person us already an employee and is vaccinated due to the requirement then that person is entitled to workman's compensation. If an employee declined the required vaccine employment terminated (in most cases the individual cannot draw unemployment). If the candidate declined he or she is not hired.

I do not believe we should remove freedoms that are already in place just because some do not trust a vaccine as long as the vaccine is FDA approved and deemed effective by the CDC (as these are our governing agencies).

 

[JonC]

not without being held responsible for adverse reactions.

But they are. If I had an adverse effect because I took a flu shot required for my job then I collect workman's compensation. Same with any required vaccination.

What I am getting at is the only people here wanting to strip an existing freedom are the anti-covid-vaxers.

 

[JonC]

Employers have not had the right to force flu shots, not in Ga anyway. We dealt with that in the early 90s at the county I worked for. We, the opposition won. County attorney told administrator that the proponderance of legal precidentv was against him.
You advocate choice by force!

In Georgia some Healthcare firms have required employees to be vaccinated against the flu for decades. Empoyees who decline are terminated.

I am not advocating any change to our rights.

You are advocating rights be stripped from American citizens and companies. You are trying to move us one step closer to a socialistic nation.

 

[Two Wings]

But they are. If I had an adverse effect because I took a flu shot required for my job then I collect workman's compensation. Same with any required vaccination.

What I am getting at is the only people here wanting to strip an existing freedom are the anti-covid-vaxers.

huh? The government's mandating a vaccine isn't stripping rights? c'mon Jon.

workman's comp expires. 6 weeks? It's far less than full pay. The adverse affects can be worse than the disease. That's been my experience with the flu shot and burning earned sick time on a jab I didn't want in the first place is wrong.

In my profession's example, the adverse effect doesn't have to be much to take you out of going to work. The FAA imposed a 48 hour minimum ... cv jab to brake release. The issues go FAR beyond 48 hours. They result in losing the medical certificate required to do the job.

If you're gonna mandate it, provide for it. If the vax is really SAFE (even if not effective) ... then stand behind it. You expect a product or service you purchase to have backing, right? This is the same thing.

Texas teachers call it "unfunded mandates."

 

[Reynolds]

In Georgia some Healthcare firms have required employees to be vaccinated against the flu for decades. Empoyees who decline are terminated.

I am not advocating any change to our rights.

You are advocating rights be stripped from American citizens and companies. You are trying to move us one step closer to a socialistic nation.

Healthcare has always been different than general business. Maybe it's past time to restore freedom to health care.
You are trying to move toward totalitarianism. I don't disagree with an employer making a market driven free choice. That is not what's happening. The govt is using financial and regulatory totalitarianism to force the employer into a position where they have no economically viable choice. A forced choice is not freedom!
Any time you remove choices from individual citizens and give that choice to a larger group or entity, it is stripping freedom.

 

[KenH]

aerobic septic system

 

[JonC]

huh? The government's mandating a vaccine isn't stripping rights? c'mon Jon.

workman's comp expires. 6 weeks? It's far less than full pay. The adverse affects can be worse than the disease. That's been my experience with the flu shot and burning earned sick time on a jab I didn't want in the first place is wrong.

In my profession's example, the adverse effect doesn't have to be much to take you out of going to work. The FAA imposed a 48 hour minimum ... cv jab to brake release. The issues go FAR beyond 48 hours. They result in losing the medical certificate required to do the job.

If you're gonna mandate it, provide for it. If the vax is really SAFE (even if not effective) ... then stand behind it. You expect a product or service you purchase to have backing, right? This is the same thing.

Texas teachers call it "unfunded mandates."

The federal government mandating vaccines for federal emoyees and federal contractors is not stripping rights. Historically they have the right to mandate vaccines for their employees.

Tge federal government requiring employments with over 100 people to require a vaccine OR covid test is, IMHO, federal overreach. But this not stripping rights. Businesses still have the choice. But it is overreach. It would perhaps be different were we speaking of state governments.

What you seem to be doing is trying to justify tge removal of rights based on your conclusions of tge virus and vaccine. Even if federal regulations resulted in restricting business decisions (they do) this is not a reason to advocate actually denying businesses owners of their rights.

 

[JonC]

Employers have not had the right to force flu shots, not in Ga anyway. We dealt with that in the early 90s at the county I worked for. We, the opposition won. County attorney told administrator that the proponderance of legal precidentv was against him.
You advocate choice by force!

In Georgia several health firms do require vaccinations. State laws fo not trump constitutional freedoms. Piedmont Health care, for example, requires a flu shot as a condition of employment.

Not only that - Georgia law allows for the health dept to mandate vaccines without exemptions.

But you still remain utterly confused. I am not sure what part you ate struggling with but your repeating false information does not make it true.

You are apparently ignorant concerning Georgia - which would be strange were it not for your general lack of comprehension on his thread concerning my view against forcing vaccinations.

Of course I do not advocate forcing vaccinations. That has been made very clear.

 

[Two Wings]

ha!
thanks. Actually it was an unwelcome surprise to the construction budget ... and another example of government overreach/excessive regulation.

Overall the system hasn't been AS BAD as i thought, but it hasn't been without mechanical failure either. the standard anaerobic system just needs gravity. That hasn't failed yet.


But back to point ... I do my best to minimize the endless PAs about the stupid masks. I'll give my #1 FA a 20 second aerospace physiology lesson to help aid understanding that some folks really DO just need to breathe and they're not making a stink. Unless you're a resident of Divide Colorado and spend most of your time working/exercising there, you're losing about 2/3 of your acclimated oxygen in an airliner. No one talks about that, but it's true. Now typically the most physical exertion is standing up/walking to the lav or perhaps fetching a bag from the overnoggin bin. ... but the mask IS another brick in the wall. Some who have weak respiration on the ground find it a challenge, then the mask, too? It can result in hypoxia which means a medical problem and possible divert.

early in this ... event ... the airlines and manufacturers sponsored a study and promotion therein of the relative safety being in an airliner. They weren't wrong. The air entering the cabin has been compressed which puts the temp at about 250 deg F. No virus is surviving that, so the air is sterilized of bio hazard when it enters the cabin. The air is exchanged (on average) once every 7-8 minutes as there are "fixed bleeds" (the lavatories) and the pressurization control outflow valve. It's under approximately 8 PSI. The cabin is literally "trying" to blow itself apart like a balloon. You're sitting inside an ATV tire! LOL. This is also why there's no human who's opening the door at 35,000.

So ... the mask. yeah. it's not helping mitigate the spread, but it makes enough people feel good that it's apparently here to stay so we can continue to jab people under an EUA. If ya want a reference to a good option, PM me. You can make others feel good, comply with the rule/policy/edict, and yet breathe without fogging yer spectacles.

 

[Two Wings]

What you seem to be doing is trying to justify tge removal of rights based on your conclusions of tge virus and vaccine.

no sir ... I stated it as clearly as I know how.

If you're going to defend a mandate, the mandating authority has to be responsible for the mandate. That includes the liability of an employee's adverse reaction/death/disability. No one is offering that which is why these jabs aren't "FDA approved" but continue under the EUA. (authorized, but not approved)

There's a policy to wear a high vis vest on the ramp at the airport. I don't buy my own, the company provides it. it's their rule, they provide.

There's a rule on some aircraft to have a boom mic for operations in certain situations. They provide the boom mic on the airplane.

See?

Your rejection of the government mandate isn't stripping rights (as you say it) is simply ludicrous. It is the definition of stripping individual rights to make such a requirement.

The government's mandating everyone aspirate is not such an example.

 

[carpro]

I wear a mask when it is requested...even when I would rather not.

I agree...up to a point.

Living in Texas, a business may require their customers to wear masks. I leave when they do. There are lots of shopping alternatives available.

Flying? I really had no choice this time. So, I complied.

I believe Airline personnel are saying it's a "Federal Law" for the purpose of intimidation. But I'm not sure if that comes from management or if employees use the term because they think it helps empower them as mask police. However, it seemed one steward was very careful with his wording and avoided calling it a "federal law". So, I'm still wondering.

 

[JonC]

Any time you remove choices from individual citizens and give that choice to a larger group or entity, it is stripping freedom.

We are talking about employment. You ate arguing against allowing men to make decisions regarding their businesses and instead giving those rights to the individual citizens.

This is socialistic.

 

[Two Wings]

I believe Airline personnel are saying it's a "Federal Law" for the purpose of intimidation.

no sir. crews are saying that because they are now compelled to enforce the policy from the government. Kicker is, nothing really changed. All airlines had a must wear mask policy long before Biden's edict.

The Federal Law part comes from the authority in the Fed Aviation Regulations which makes the pilot in command (Captain) the supreme authority on the airplane. It's federal law to comply with crewmember instructions.

So until a crew member is directing an action which is beyond any reasonable act ... you comply. Reminding you to do what you said you were going to do when you bought your ticket and boarded the airplane is not an illegal instruction.

 

[KenH]

So ... the mask.

Personally, I now only wear a mask in a healthcare setting where I have to, such as when I went to my opthamologist a couple of months ago, or in a place when most people are currently wearing masks, such as in Walmart, while my county is having a large uptick in COVID-19 cases, as it has been since July. I am rather introverted in such places and don't want to draw attention to myself.