“Thousands of Unvaccinated New York City School Employees Placed on Unpaid Leave” (Wall Street Journal, 10/4/2021) describes those who #Resist, but not in a good way:
Thousands of New York City school staff were barred from returning to work Monday for failing to comply with a vaccination mandate that took effect Friday afternoon.
Under the terms of the mandate, all school employees needed to show proof by Friday afternoon that they received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine to avoid being placed on unpaid leave.
(It’s a “mandate,” not an “order”)
These employees aren’t fired, but are only on “unpaid leave.” Does that mean they’re unable to collect unemployment insurance? Is this a brilliant Catch-22 strategy by the city government? People can’t collect unemployment unless they’re fired. The infidels #Resisting the Church of Shutdown haven’t been fired. But on the other hand, there is no way for them to get a paycheck unless they accept Saint Fauci as their personal savior.
Have we created a society where a lifetime of government assistance (means-tested public housing, Medicaid, SNAP/EBT, and Obamaphone) is available to folks who say “I need to spend 24/7 drinking, smoking dope, and consuming opioids” but nothing is available to those who say “I’m a healthy 25-year-old, already had COVID-19, and don’t think the risk-reward of a COVID-19 vaccine makes sense for me”?
Separately, given that NYC, if it were its own country, would be right near the top of countries ranked by COVID-19 death rate, shouldn’t we expect that most of the unvaccinated have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 and therefore have at least as good immunity as the vaccinated? (Nearly all of my friends in NYC eventually got either a positive COVID test result, some symptoms, or both.)
Related:
- “Won’t Get The Covid Vaccine? If You’re Fired, You May Not Get Unemployment Benefits” (Forbes): … there’s one big, new exception that could block your eligibility to get unemployment benefits: You get fired because you’re not vaccinated for Covid-19. … In short, probably not. If an employer terminates you because you don’t follow its policies, it has “cause” to fire you. And if you’re fired “for cause,” you may be ineligible to claim unemployment benefits. … Some states have made it clear that people terminated for not adhering to vaccination policies are likely precluded from receiving benefits. Oregon is one example of a state that has mandated health care, education, and government workers to get vaccinated. The head of the state Employment Department has said eligibility will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, but those terminated by public or private employers for refusing to get vaccinated probably won’t be eligible.
Here’s another wrinkle: The early push to have prisoners vaccinated may have come full circle. Now that so many businesses can’t find workers, they are hiring “…ex-inmates who’ve gone through prison job-training programs run by community colleges.” I guess this works out because I’m sure those former prisoners would rather get vaccinated than return to prison.
“Connecticut manufacturers, desperate for workers, are hiring ex-imates.”
https://www.courant.com/business/hc-biz-prison-inmates-manufacturing-20211012-cgynifxikndzpjgodo7dd2vuki-story.html
Maybe I’m wrong though! If the company requires vaccination, will the ex-inmates prefer to take the jab than go back to jail? Can they collect unemployment in Connecticut if they are fired for refusing to be vaccinated?
“they are hiring “…ex-inmates who’ve gone through prison job-training programs run by community colleges.” ”
An acquaintance formerly held a mid-level professional job for a large FL county government. His job required frequent contact with the county department running the water & sewer system. He advised that a large number of the workers were ex-cons, including many violent felons, that got the requisite training and certifications while incarcerated.
I remember being mocked on this very forum for suggesting that welfare recipients will soon have to be vaccinated. We can file that in another bird brained prediction coming true!
TS: As of November 2020, those living free were still from a bodily autonomy point of view. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-food-stamps-vaccine/fact-check-people-will-not-have-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19-to-receive-food-stamps-and-rent-assistance-idUSKBN2802LY
And from September 2021, https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/572858-why-does-bidens-vaccine-mandate-not-apply-to-welfare-recipients-and-others
“But Biden’s federal vaccine mandate does not apply to Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, members of Congress, U.S. Postal Service employees and several other groups.”
(Of course, someone living in a taxpayer-funded house, receiving taxpayer-funded health care, eating taxpayer-funded food, and talking on a taxpayer-funded Obamaphone is not “on welfare” if he/she/ze/they does not receive supplemental cash on top of these in-kind benefits.)
Unpaid leave game eliminates unemployment and is a hedge for when the courts or the people end this nonsense. They can hide behind the ‘I didn’t fire anyone or coerce anyone to take an experimental medical treatment. They just went on unpaid leave.’
Imagine employees getting unpaid leave because they wouldn’t have sex with their boss.
This won’t end well for these companies, even if the courts don’t crush them not many will ever work for them again.
“These employees aren’t fired, but are only on “unpaid leave.” ”
I presume these employees’ employer-subsidized health insurance continues while on unpaid leave.