I feel so frustrated about people refusing vaccination…

[happi duck]

Death isn't the only concern and I'll never understand those who can't, or pretend not to, understand that.

I know a young man on a college running scholarship who caught covid early on and still can't run.

I know a woman, 40s no health conditions, who had covid early on and still can't function.  So much pain and brain fog.

The death numbers are horrible enough and we don't even consider the disability numbers.

[ktgrok]

51 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

Bruce Patterson is a quack who is ripping people off. He did the same with HIV and cancer.

Please stop pushing his bogus (and expensive) fake long-haul treatments. This is a con-job. More Ivermectin nonsense.

Bill

My friend's dad is helped design and build the first Hyperbaric chambers. Even he doesn't support their use for EVERYTHING. Wound healing, certain things that are oxygen dependent, yes. But not everything is. (also, can I say that him sharing before and after wound pictures at the dinner table was...interesting...lol)

[BusyMom5]

9 minutes ago, happi duck said:

Death isn't the only concern and I'll never understand those who can't, or pretend not to, understand that.

I know a young man on a college running scholarship who caught covid early on and still can't run.

I know a woman, 40s no health conditions, who had covid early on and still can't function.  So much pain and brain fog.

The death numbers are horrible enough and we don't even consider the disability numbers.

This is my main concern as well.  I know a few people in their 30s and 40s who got sick last year,  before the vaccine, and they are still struggling and looking at long-term lung damage.   One has still not got taste back right,  and its been almost a year.  I cannot imagine!  Of course these are not as bad as dying,  but its still a major life-changing illness.  

There is a difference between being select-vax or delayed vax for babies and saying no to Covid vax.  With Covid, I feel like you are either going to get Covid or the shot- and possibly both if you have a breakthrough case.   With many of the baby vaccines,  you have a much less chance of coming into contact with the virus- even when I was a kid, chicken pox went around,  but lots of us were school age before we were exposed- a few got it younger, but I remember having it, as do my siblings, parents, husband, etc.  Covid is everywhere right now- unless you mask all the time, you will come in contact with it.  

[Spy Car]

2 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

My friend's dad is helped design and build the first Hyperbaric chambers. Even he doesn't support their use for EVERYTHING. Wound healing, certain things that are oxygen dependent, yes. But not everything is. (also, can I say that him sharing before and after wound pictures at the dinner table was...interesting...lol)

Not hyperbaric chambers.

There is a YouTube con-man who is pushing Ivermectin and other bogus cures for long Covid and unfortunately he keeps getting promoted here.

No corner of the internet is safe from this sort of disinformation.

Bill

[Pawz4me]

5 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

My friend's dad is helped design and build the first Hyperbaric chambers. Even he doesn't support their use for EVERYTHING. Wound healing, certain things that are oxygen dependent, yes. But not everything is. (also, can I say that him sharing before and after wound pictures at the dinner table was...interesting...lol)

The people I'm aware of who've had legit HBOC treatments (and by that I mean treatments offered by reputable medical facilities) are cancer patients who've developed osteonecrosis of the jaw as a side effect of their treatments (it's a relatively common SE). For some it seems to work well, although it takes many treatments. It seems to me it's become a very faddish thing now, though, and I'm very skeptical of how much validity there is for most of the claims. But I get that way anytime something is pushed as a treatment/cure for multitudes of conditions.

[Pam in CT]

4 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

@Mrs Tiggywinkle@brehon

You might find this thread at r/nursing (Reddit) validating. (side note: this is a "Code Blue" thread, meaning OP & commentors have been verified by mods as being HCWs)

It's not worth the breath it takes to respond to a dedicated anti-vaxxer. You'd think the fact that ~2,000 people die every day of Covid (the vast majority unvaccinated), that ~25% of Delta Covid survivors have at least one long-hauler symptom, that dozens of Covid Go Fund Me pages are up at any one time, etc etc might open minds, but it doesn't. So be it. Humans are not magically above natural selection, and that's what is happening now.

 

Wow.  That's a frame, isn't it.

 

True Story:

In the early stages of this horror show, whose darkness happened to first descend upon us just as Passover began back in March 2020, I received it through the frame of a plague, that God sent upon us, to teach us.  (This is metaphor, I am not a literalist, but I take my metaphors quite seriously.)  And I spent a fair amount of time -- suddenly, I *had* a lot of unexpected time -- trying to work out what lessons we were meant to learn

I expected the vaccine development to take 2-3 YEARS.  (Based on my husband's biotech experience) I expected any vaccine to be only ~50+% effective, as the regular flu vaccines often are and as the FDA's initially announced benchmarks were; which would, still, dampen spread but would, still, enable the plague to persist for years.  When the mRNA vaccines came through at Warp Speed, less than a year from the plague's descent, hitting 90+% benchmarks, I received that as miraculous.  (Within my tradition, miracles are, often, a partnership between God and humans.) 

Deliverance.

Except, as it turned out: Not.  Because we are a stiff-necked people.  Because we quarrel on how to read the signs.  Because we spurn the manna meant to sustain us.  Because when times are fraught with hardship and uncertainty we turn on each other.  Every time, now as then.

So 18 months into this the United States, with all its wealth and technology and logistics capacity, is in per capita terms among the worst-affected nations on earth.  More than 1/500 of us are now dead of the disease; more than 13% of us have been confirmed to have had it (and many more left untested & confirmed); with an unknown but evidently significant percentage of those suffering long term effects.  And the bills are not yet paid: thousands of families and hundreds of hospitals will be left struggling under financial duress for years; the cost to state and federal governments will suppress fiscal room to maneuver for decades to come.  Yet *we* are the lucky ones, with more vaccines available than arms willing to receive them.  No nation on earth has more COVID blessings than we do, yet we're spurning the gift.  We are -- in the actual, arithmetic (and also: biblical) meaning of the term, decimated.

What's the lesson at *this* point, then? 

By slow degrees - this is not the worldview I used to hold, at all -- my frame has shifted, from God trying to teach us how to act collectively, to care for and protect each other; and also to use our unique capacity for science and data and medicine that we alone among the species have, to manage exogenous shocks like this; and also maybe to slow down, to pry our eyes off of flickering screens and cherish IRL physical contact with our IRL families and loved ones...

... to something more like slow-mo Rapture.  Where those who trust in horses are naturally selected from those who trust in chariots; where those are sure they are ready to meet their Maker have an easy route to do so; where those who are sure that God only cares about the individual rather than the collective whole of creation, have the chance to test that hypothesis.  (Again this is metaphor, I am not a literalist, but I take metaphor even more seriously today, than I did 18 months ago.)

Something about the Rapture metaphor that has always struck me has been: it is not actually clear who's the Select.  One perspective -- that of its adherents -- is that God *takes* the Select, and there's a Mad Max horror show left behind.  But another possible way to look at the same imagined scenario is that once all those who want to be taken, are taken, and leave the earth.... the ones left would be the ones who believe in collective action like universal health care, who cherish creation and so hug the trees and protect the air, who work however haltingly toward Social Justice.  So *maybe* the remnant Left Behind would look like Mad Max; but alternatively, perhaps it would look more like Canada.  And who knows, perhaps God *wants* us to look more like Canada.  That is the Noah story.  (Again, metaphor.)

What I've always liked about the Canada take on Rapture is, everybody's happy.  Those taken believe they're the Select... and so too, do those left behind.  Great Divorce, except without the (human) certainty about (divine) Truth.

 

And as I stare at the bolded I'm struck: perhaps that's a far more succinct, and less metaphoric, way to state the same thing.

[ktgrok]

In good news, my BIL and his girlfriend got their 2nd dose yesterday!!!!! They held off a long time, and are often sucked into misinformation stuff - don't ask about the "ad packs" scam he invested in! Ugh. Last we'd talked to them they were not vaccinating. I have been SO worried about them, and dreading saying they can't visit without masks at the new house. 

Yesterday found out they just got their second dose! He works for FedEx so I'm betting the mandate may have changed his mind - he doesn't want to look for another job. This is the first place he's done well at, so I know he wants to stay, and having his supervisors getting vaxed would have influenced him. And she has health issues, and may work for a company that has mandates as well. 

so yay for mandates - my husband has already lost his mom and dad to other things, he needs his brother to be around a long time. 

[Spy Car]

23 minutes ago, happi duck said:

Death isn't the only concern and I'll never understand those who can't, or pretend not to, understand that.

I know a young man on a college running scholarship who caught covid early on and still can't run.

I know a woman, 40s no health conditions, who had covid early on and still can't function.  So much pain and brain fog.

The death numbers are horrible enough and we don't even consider the disability numbers.

The prospect that long Covid will prove to be a life-long illness that's indistinguishable from ME/CFS (which seems like the case) is one of the most terrifying aspects of this pandemic.

And it seems to be hitting the hardest in cohorts who are deemed least vulnerable to death and hospitalization (younger people) and in those who didn't appear to me that sick initially.

We are likely facing a serious issue with serious disabilities moving forward.

My son had a drafting/computer-aided-design teacher in his 30s who has long Covid. He's really struggling.

But he's also refusing to get vaccinated and is about to lose his job as a result. It is madness.

Bill

 

[Spy Car]

7 minutes ago, Pawz4me said:

The people I'm aware of who've had legit HBOC treatments (and by that I mean treatments offered by reputable medical facilities) are cancer patients who've developed osteonecrosis of the jaw as a side effect of their treatments (it's a relatively common SE). For some it seems to work well, although it takes many treatments. It seems to me it's become a very faddish thing now, though, and I'm very skeptical of how much validity there is for most of the claims. But I get that way anytime something is pushed as a treatment/cure for multitudes of conditions.

Just to be clear, my earlier comments criticizing the quack who is pushing Ivermectin and other scientifically-unsupported "cures" is apart from the separate issue of HBOC treatments (of which I have no reasoned position).

I do wish this forum was not used to advance the interests of a con-man.

Bill

[WildflowerMom]

1 hour ago, Janeway said:

Although I did vaccinate, it did ruffle my feathers big-time that the government would have the nerve to step in and try to force the vaccinations to such an extreme that our tax dollars are paying for the National Guard to do jobs for nurses who probably already contracted it because they’ve been doing the job for so long. It’s so ruffled my feathers about the mandated vaccinations, that I probably would not of gotten vaccinated because of that. And I know there are a lot of people not getting vaccinated because they feel shoved in the corner and like somebody’s trying to control them. It has nothing to do with this Carlson guy that I don’t even know who he is I don’t watch him I’m not into watching talk shows or listening to them. But when the government steps in and tries to take peoples rights away from controlling their own bodies, it leaves me feeling like I need to stand up all the more for my rights. And I know that there are a lot of people that feel this way. I am not saying this to start an argument I’m just saying this to hopefully invite and some people that the forced militant damaging behaviors from the government have lead a lot of people who otherwise would’ve been vaccinated to not get vaccinated. 

First, I'm glad you're here, Janeway, because I think you bring varying view points to the discussion and we need that, whether I agree with some of them or not.   So, I'm not picking on you or trying to pick your position apart, just trying to understand it.  

I was also vaxed in a national guard set-up.  I don't have a problem with them helping out in states' matters.  I think that was their original purpose--the protection and safety of the particular state they reside in.   (I'm not crazy about them going overseas, tbh.  But that's a different discussion obviously.) 

"It’s so ruffled my feathers about the mandated vaccinations, that I probably would not of gotten vaccinated because of that. And I know there are a lot of people not getting vaccinated because they feel shoved in the corner and like somebody’s trying to control them." 
☝🏽  This is the part I'm really trying to understand.  You're not the first person here to say this, just the most recent.   I don't understand this sentiment at.all.   If the 'govt' tells you (general you-- I mean this for anyone who believes the above bolded statement), you must be 16 to drive a car, do you buck the law and let your 13 year old drive?   If the govt tells you that you can't have an BAC above .08% and drive a car, do you try for .09% and see what happens?    If the govt says schools must be desegregated, do you try to find a private school with only kids of a certain color?   If the state law says your kid must have the meningitis vaccine to be admitted to college, do you forge a document or not allow the kid to attend college?   These are obviously all varying degrees of govt mandates, but I think the same idea applies.   If you (general you-- I'm speaking to people who won't get vaxed for the sole reason that the govt would like you to [it's still not a mandate at this point] buck the system on this one vax, do you buck the system on others vaxed?  Do you buck the system when it comes to other laws (or suggestions, in this case)?  
 

"But when the government steps in and tries to take peoples rights away from controlling their own bodies, it leaves me feeling like I need to stand up all the more for my rights."  
I know you are in Texas.   Because of this above statement, I assume you are also mad about the 'no abortion over 6 weeks' law that was passed a while back?    I know they're appealing it or something for right now, but I assume you are also standing up for your rights and all women's rights in that case, as well?    Because that is really about the govt controlling your body, much more than a little shot.  
 

(Forgive me if some of this doesn't make total sense...  arthritis pain medicine does that to me. 😱😆)

[ktgrok]

23 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

The prospect that long Covid will prove to be a life-long illness that's indistinguishable from ME/CFS (which seems like the case) is one of the most terrifying aspects of this pandemic.

And it seems to be hitting the hardest in cohorts who are deemed least vulnerable to death and hospitalization (younger people) and in those who didn't appear to me that sick initially.

We are likely facing a serious issue with serious disabilities moving forward.

My son had a drafting/computer-aided-design teacher in his 30s who has long Covid. He's really struggling.

But he's also refusing to get vaccinated and is about to lose his job as a result. It is madness.

Bill

 

Yup. I have two local people I know with post covid issue. (probably more who don't discuss it). Both in their late 30s/early 40s, somewhat overweight but active and fit and smart as heck. Both "go go go" types. This has been life altering for them. 

[Bootsie]

58 minutes ago, Quill said:

Both are reasonable, however one side is trying to force the vaccine with coercion (some people on this thread have advocated for that).  I’m not trying to prevent anyone from getting the mRNA if they want it. 
 

What annoys me when people say “vaccine coercion” related to the COVID vax is that being required to be vaccinated to go certain places, participate in certain activities, or even have certain jobs (like military service, for example) is this: there is *nothing new whatsoever* about that dictate. Unless you were raised Amish or Orthodox Jew, I’m willing to bet you have already yourself submitted and/or submitted your kid(s) to numerous vaccines since they were weeks, if not hours, old. There is precedent of a hundred years of mandatory public health measures. My MIL’s sister was quarantined for many months as a child because she had TB. Nobody, AFAIK, screamed she was falsely imprisoned and her liberties were besmirched because she was shut up in a room with a red X on the door. 
 

I personally am in favor of government agencies and personal businesses being able to *require* vaccination for employment unless one can produce a legitimate waiver. If you don’t like them apples, you can change employment; it’s a robust job market right now; if one is such a valuable employee they should have no problem finding a job where they can work unvaxed. Where I live, employment is “at will” so - and I don’t personally like this but it’s true - your boss can order you to wear a beige jumpsuit to work every day and, if you refuse because jumpsuits suck for bathroom breaks or beige is not in your color palette, they are perfectly at liberty to fire your ass and hire someone willing to wear an ugly and inconvenient uniform. 
 

I have trouble understanding why *anybody* thinks they have, up until now, enjoyed *TOTAL* freedom to do *whatever* they want and not have to comply with a ton of arbitrary rules for their jobs, schools, colleges or even neighborhoods. If you live where there’s an HOA, you can’t paint your house purple or have a pet panther, even though you own the house. I know neighborhoods where your dog cannot be a Pit Bull or a German Shepherd. At my kid’s school, students can’t wear a hat or sunglasses inside. The point is, in society, we *almost all* capitulate to tons of rules and concessions in order to participate in bunches of stuff. Really, only an off-grid prepper living on a South Dakota homestead is relatively free from those demands. 
 

If you can explain why this is different from all that, I will listen. It hasn’t made sense to me so far, though. 

I think there is a big difference in an employer choosing to require a COVID vaccine for its employees and the government mandating that the employer require the vaccine.  

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

This in no way addresses vaccine hesitancy among those who are retired, work for an employer with less than 100 employees, are in school, etc.  At this point, from what I understand the US government cannot require that people be vaccinated.  I see this as a round-about way to force some businesses to do what the US government doesn't have the authority to do and then fine those businesses and then fine those business if they are in compliance.  My thoughts on this are not only about whether the government should mandate vaccines, but also on the use of businesses to enforce a policy the government wants (but does not have the authority to implement).

[ktgrok]

25 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I think there is a big difference in an employer choosing to require a COVID vaccine for its employees and the government mandating that the employer require the vaccine.  

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

This in no way addresses vaccine hesitancy among those who are retired, work for an employer with less than 100 employees, are in school, etc.  At this point, from what I understand the US government cannot require that people be vaccinated.  I see this as a round-about way to force some businesses to do what the US government doesn't have the authority to do and then fine those businesses and then fine those business if they are in compliance.  My thoughts on this are not only about whether the government should mandate vaccines, but also on the use of businesses to enforce a policy the government wants (but does not have the authority to implement).

OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety. 

[Bootsie]

3 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety. 

I understand that OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety.  That's it's job.  My employer must provide me with a harness if I am doing certain types of jobs.  My employer needs to make sure that there are not cords I will trip over.  This is not about job-related worker safety.  Some employees must wear a hard hat because of their job situation; some employees must wear a harness because of their job situation.  I do not have to wear a harness and hard hat in my job.  Just because an employer has 100 workers does not mean those workers are at risk from contracting COVID from a coworker; it is not situationally based.  

[wathe]

4 hours ago, I talk to the trees said:

1- Thank you for all you do. I know HCWs are burned out and exhausted, but keep trudging onward. Know that there are those out there who greatly appreciate you. 

2-I am so sorry. Sorry that you have to deal with situations like you describe. Sorry that people are unwilling to do their part in reducing the strain on the health care system. Sorry that people are so selfish that they can’t see beyond the end of their own nose. And sorry that even after reading post after post after post from you and other HCWs, there are those on this very forum who foolishly continue to spread and defend the misinformation that has cost and will cost so very many lives. 
 

This is kind, and I appreciate it.  Thank you

Unfortunately, many staff are declining to trudge on. They are leaving.  We have lost 2 senior MDs in the last month, with a third with his foot out the door.  We haven't had a full nursing complement in months and months.  We routinely work short - very, very short.  Anyone who can afford to leave is leaving -  near retirement, or with enough seniority to transfer to another department, or financially able to quit - they are all gone.  We are losing senior, experienced people, who should still have many years left.  I have never seen so much turnover in my 20+ year career.  Replacement staff, when we can get them, are young and green.  The collective loss of experience is tremendously damaging to the department and very bad for patient care.  These are jobs where experience really matters.  The fallout from this will be felt for years and years.

[Guest]

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

 

Why do you say an employer cannot make employees vaccinate? I thought that was established: yes they can. Also, semantically speaking, the wording I have heard is “voluntary termination.” So, if you won’t get vaccinated as required, you have quit, not been fired. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Quill

[TechWife]

2 hours ago, MercyA said:

Thank you for posting this, MEmama, because I *know* I rarely remember to say it, even though it is always on my mind in threads like these.

, @itsheresomewhere.

I hope when I use the word choice, people realize that by doing so, those with legitimate medical need are not included in those who are making a choice not to get vaccinated. One of the reasons I vaccinated is because I realize that some people really don’t have the choice available to them -  my vaccine helps to protect them from illness by reducing the likelihood they will be exposed to Covid. 

[wathe]

9 hours ago, TechWife said:

I hope when I use the word choice, people realize that by doing so, those with legitimate medical need are not included in those who are making a choice not to get vaccinated. One of the reasons I vaccinated is because I realize that some people really don’t have the choice available to them -  my vaccine helps to protect them from illness by reducing the likelihood they will be exposed to Covid. 

Using to jump off:

And that vaccine passport programs and government employee mandates and other mandates that have been discussed in this thread and elsewhere on the board all have exemptions for those with legit medical or religious contraindications to the vaccine.  I haven't seen one that doesn't.

Edited for word choice

 

ETA - I've learned down thread that religious exemptions aren't universal.  Medical exemptions do seem to be universal, though, if narrowly defined (which I agree with).

Edited October 14, 2021 by wathe

[Bootsie]

5 minutes ago, Quill said:

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

 

Why do you say an employer cannot make employees vaccinate? I thought that was established: yes they can. Also, semantically speaking, the wording I have heard is “voluntary termination.” So, if you won’t get vaccinated as required, you have quit, not been fired. 

They can terminate the the employee.  They cannot make the employee vaccinate.  In this situation they are an enforcer of a consequence if the employee does not vaccinate.  This policy simply places the burden of enforcing a government policy on employers.  

[MEmama]

3 minutes ago, wathe said:

Using to jump off:

And that vaccine passport programs and government employee mandates and other mandates that have been discussed in this thread and elsewhere on the board all have exclusions for those with legit medical or religious exemptions.  I haven't seen one that doesn't.

My state doesn’t accept so-called religious exemptions for any vaccination, since it’s not a valid excuse (no religions are actually opposed to vaccines). But medical exemptions, yes, of course. 

[Harriet Vane]

57 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I understand that OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety.  That's it's job.  My employer must provide me with a harness if I am doing certain types of jobs.  My employer needs to make sure that there are not cords I will trip over.  This is not about job-related worker safety.  Some employees must wear a hard hat because of their job situation; some employees must wear a harness because of their job situation.  I do not have to wear a harness and hard hat in my job.  Just because an employer has 100 workers does not mean those workers are at risk from contracting COVID from a coworker; it is not situationally based.  

I'm honestly totally confused by your statement here. Anyone can transmit covid before they are symptomatic and also when they are symptomatic. It is a highly infectious, contagious virus. If there are 100 people in a space, then yes, covid transmission is a risk. If there are 5 people, there is a risk. The only situations in which there is lower risk is when the employee is not around people or is outdoors with distancing or if stringent masking protocols with excellent ventilation are followed. 

The presence of breathing people = risk.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

They can terminate the the employee.  They cannot make the employee vaccinate.  In this situation they are an enforcer of a consequence if the employee does not vaccinate.  This policy simply places the burden of enforcing a government policy on employers.  

Employers *can* say, “All employees here must be vaccinated for X.” Yes, they can. Employers can make that a condition of working there. 
 

You’re coming from an assumption that the government requires it but the employer otherwise wouldn’t. I don’t get why that is your assumption. *I* personally would be opposed to working somewhere that most people did not have to be vaccinated. I would *want* to work somewhere that employee health is valued. 

[wathe]

36 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

They can terminate the the employee.  They cannot make the employee vaccinate.  In this situation they are an enforcer of a consequence if the employee does not vaccinate.  This policy simply places the burden of enforcing a government policy on employers.  

But that's true of most health and safety policies.  The employer is generally responsible for enforcing compliance with all of them - hard hats, safety boots, sharps disposal, other mandatory vaccinations, Tb testing, mandatory workplace safety training.  The employer has to ensure compliance, and the employer is on the hook if inspected and non-compliant.  This isn't new.

[Bootsie]

7 minutes ago, wathe said:

But that's true of most health and safety policies.  The employer is generally responsible for enforcing compliance with all of them - hard hats, safety boots, sharps disposal, other mandatory vaccinations, Tb testing, mandatory workplace safety training.  The employer has to ensure compliance, and the employer is on the hook if inspected and non-compliant.  This isn't new.

But these are directly work-related safety and health compliance issues.  OSHA does not require that my employe provide a hard hat and safety boots for me because I do not have a reasonable risk of a work-related injury that could be mitigated from a hard hat or safety boots.  It would not be reasonable for OSHA to mandate that all workers wear a hard hat at all times or the business will be fined.  Simply because a firm has 100 or more workers does not mean that any workers health or safety is impacted by the vaccination status of another worker (who does not even necessarily work in the same location or ever come in contact with another employee).  A worker may actually have much more health risk due to exposure of the employer's customers or the employer's suppliers --if this were truly work-related concern then the employer would also be required to ensure that the employee is not exposed due to contact with cusstomers or suppliers, not simply co=workers.

[Bootsie]

41 minutes ago, Quill said:

Employers *can* say, “All employees here must be vaccinated for X.” Yes, they can. Employers can make that a condition of working there. 
 

You’re coming from an assumption that the government requires it but the employer otherwise wouldn’t. I don’t get why that is your assumption. *I* personally would be opposed to working somewhere that most people did not have to be vaccinated. I would *want* to work somewhere that employee health is valued. 

Yes they can require it as a condition of employment, that is different than making someone be vaccinated.  I can't make my child eat his peas.  I can require him to eat his peas before he has any other food; I can send him to his room if he doesn't eat his peas; I can say he must remain at the table until he eats his peas and forceably pick him up and put him back in his seat at the table over and over.  But, short of holding him down and injecting him with peas, I can't make him eat his peas--and, while I may strongly value having my kid eat his peas I must be aware of my ability (or lack of it) to coerce my child forcibly to eat his peas--it is not without consequences.  

I am specifically talking about using OSHA to require employers to require their employees to vaccinate.  If the employer is going to require it anyway, there is no need for the OSHA requirement.  That is simply an added government regulation that isn't doing anythning but adding uncessary paperwork and bureacracy.  So, if the starting assumption is that employers will require vaccine as a requirement for working, then using OSHA to ensure it is not necessary.   

[Bootsie]

53 minutes ago, Harriet Vane said:

I'm honestly totally confused by your statement here. Anyone can transmit covid before they are symptomatic and also when they are symptomatic. It is a highly infectious, contagious virus. If there are 100 people in a space, then yes, covid transmission is a risk. If there are 5 people, there is a risk. The only situations in which there is lower risk is when the employee is not around people or is outdoors with distancing or if stringent masking protocols with excellent ventilation are followed. 

The presence of breathing people = risk.

But an employer having 100 employees does not imply that there are 100 people in a space.  It does not even imply that 2 people are within miles of each other.  The presence of breathing suppliers and customers can be just as risky.  This requirement does not really address the risk.  There is risk if their is electricity and water.  Most of us work in a place where there is electricity and water.  OSHA requirements are different for an electrician differently working with electricity and don't equally apply to all workers--they are specific to the risk.  

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Yes they can require it as a condition of employment, that is different than making someone be vaccinated. 

They are not *making* anyone get vaccinated. They are saying, in order to work here, you have to be vaccinated. If you refuse to be vaccinated, you don’t work here anymore. 
 

It is the same as my son’s attendance at his college campus. If he wants to be on campus, he has to be vaxxed. If he didn’t want to be vaxxed, he has two options: take only virtual classes or transfer to a college without that requirement. Nobody is holding him down, injecting him against his will, but it’s mandatory as a condition of attending in person. 

[TCB]

9 minutes ago, Bootsie said:  

I am specifically talking about using OSHA to require employers to require their employees to vaccinate.  If the employer is going to require it anyway, there is no need for the OSHA requirement.  That is simply an added government regulation that isn't doing anythning but adding uncessary paperwork and bureacracy.  So, if the starting assumption is that employers will require vaccine as a requirement for working, then using OSHA to ensure it is not necessary.   

The trouble is, I think, that some places have so many militant anti-vax, anti-mask people that an employer finds it very difficult to implement something they believe to be the right thing to do, because the push back and intimidation is huge. How can an employer do that somewhere like your state, Texas I believe, where the governor bans them from doing so? I think that is why the federal government acted on this. 
I honestly don’t know what I think of vaccine mandates, and I don’t know it it’s going to help, but there appears to be a war of intimidation going on by a certain portion of our population, along with election seeking politicians, that is not allowing others the rights they should have. Do you think it is right to give in to this intimidation?

[SKL]

26 minutes ago, wathe said:

But that's true of most health and safety policies.  The employer is generally responsible for enforcing compliance with all of them - hard hats, safety boots, sharps disposal, other mandatory vaccinations, Tb testing, mandatory workplace safety training.  The employer has to ensure compliance, and the employer is on the hook if inspected and non-compliant.  This isn't new.

I do think this is different in that it primarily directs employers to target long-standing employees, and as far as I'm aware, it doesn't have a direct connection to actual risk.  For example, there are many people who (a) have already had Covid and (b) work 100% or nearly 100% at home.  They are not a bigger risk than others who (a) have had the vax and (b) work in regular close physical contact with coworkers or customers.  But if I have 100 employees, I am supposed to fire the work-at-home person.  It doesn't matter how important said person is to my business, out she goes.

If people can't understand how ridiculous that is, then I guess they haven't worked in businesses where this is a real possibility.

This is about more than just coercing vaxes.  This is not "voluntary termination."  How fun is it going to be to go after these people and demand the company files, customer contacts, etc., and force them to train their successors in the job they just "voluntarily" left?  How about being that employee's customer?  I can just imagine informing my clients "oh well, you're on your own, I just got fired, and the transition to a new person is gonna be hell.  It took me an entire year to learn this specific job description.  But good luck."

And I suppose you all think it is totally fair and right that all these people will now be out of whatever health insurance was included in their compensation.  Kuz of course Covid is the only thing that can possibly make unvaccinated people sick, and they totally deserve Covid.  Their kids too.  Screw them all.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

They can terminate the the employee.  They cannot make the employee vaccinate.  In this situation they are an enforcer of a consequence if the employee does not vaccinate.  This policy simply places the burden of enforcing a government policy on employers.  

I think you are thinking of this as being always, or mostly a negative for the employer, but I don't think that's the case. It can really help an employer (and/or employees) when a policy like this is coming from higher up. My brother works for a large company that was having people quitting left and right as time to return to the office building approached, because of employee covid concerns. This vaccination requirement is hugely helpful to my brother and lots of his coworkers, because they feel better about returning to work with this in place, and fewer people are now quitting because of it.

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I understand that OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety.  That's it's job.  My employer must provide me with a harness if I am doing certain types of jobs.  My employer needs to make sure that there are not cords I will trip over.  This is not about job-related worker safety.  Some employees must wear a hard hat because of their job situation; some employees must wear a harness because of their job situation.  I do not have to wear a harness and hard hat in my job.  Just because an employer has 100 workers does not mean those workers are at risk from contracting COVID from a coworker; it is not situationally based.  

When I worked as a cashier at PetSmart I had to wear a back brace. I never stocked shelves, but everyone there had to wear one. At the vet clinic, we couldn't keep a soda in the fridge with the vaccines. There was nothing in there that would hurt the soda nor would the soda hurt the vaccines, everything was sealed, but still can't have lunches or staff drinks in a fridge with medical supplies. That won't always make sense, but the overarching idea is that it prevents problems. Same with this, in most cases if you have a bunch of workers working together they are at risk of Covid transmission. Some places it won't make sense because everyone is spread out or working from home, but the idea makes sense. 

[SKL]

7 minutes ago, Quill said:

They are not *making* anyone get vaccinated. They are saying, in order to work here, you have to be vaccinated. If you refuse to be vaccinated, you don’t work here anymore. 
 

It is the same as my son’s attendance at his college campus. If he wants to be on campus, he has to be vaxxed. If he didn’t want to be vaxxed, he has two options: take only virtual classes or transfer to a college without that requirement. Nobody is holding him down, injecting him against his will, but it’s mandatory as a condition of attending in person. 

Oh lucky him, he has a virtual option.  My work-at-home friend does not.  It's inject or eject.

[SKL]

5 minutes ago, TCB said:

The trouble is, I think, that some places have so many militant anti-vax, anti-mask people that an employer finds it very difficult to implement something they believe to be the right thing to do, because the push back and intimidation is huge. How can an employer do that somewhere like your state, Texas I believe, where the governor bans them from doing so? I think that is why the federal government acted on this. 
I honestly don’t know what I think of vaccine mandates, and I don’t know it it’s going to help, but there appears to be a war of intimidation going on by a certain portion of our population, along with election seeking politicians, that is not allowing others the rights they should have. Do you think it is right to give in to this intimidation?

If I as an employer want to influence people to vaccinate, I need more flexibility to do it in a way that makes sense.  Maybe an incentive rather than a threat.  And targeted to the occupations involving the greater risk of catching and spreading Covid.  Or if I'm gonna fire people, let me do it on my own timetable, so I have the opportunity to transition the work, continue customer care, and help employees transition to their new situation.  Or let me decide to put some people on remote duty until cases are lower.  Please don't pretend you're doing businesses a favor by tying their hands like this.

[TCB]

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

If I as an employer want to influence people to vaccinate, I need more flexibility to do it in a way that makes sense.  Maybe an incentive rather than a threat.  And targeted to the occupations involving the greater risk of catching and spreading Covid.  Or if I'm gonna fire people, let me do it on my own timetable, so I have the opportunity to transition the work, continue customer care, and help employees transition to their new situation.  Or let me decide to put some people on remote duty until cases are lower.  Please don't pretend you're doing businesses a favor by tying their hands like this.

So what do you think about the places that are tying businesses hands by passing laws saying they can’t mandate vaccines or masks?

Edited October 13, 2021 by TCB
Typo

[SKL]

1 minute ago, TCB said:

So what do you think about the places that are tying businesses hands buy passing laws saying they can’t mandate vaccines or masks?

That is a whole other topic and a distraction from what I was talking about.

I have always said I believe employers have a right to require things, although it may get iffy when it involves medical information, which is supposed to be protected by privacy laws.  It isn't a straightforward matter in any case, but employers should not lose rights they currently have.

I haven't read the anti-mandate legislation.  I don't necessarily trust the headlines as far as what the legislation actually requires/bans.  That said, I assume that to some degree, such legislation is a response to other authoritarian acts that [allegedly] go too far in the other direction.

[TravelingChris]

6 hours ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle said:

I shouldn’t even wade into this today.  I shouldn’t, and I will anyway. 
 

In the last 12 hours…

I held the hand of a frightened, elderly cancer patient who was hemorrhaging uncontrollably for 52 minutes on my stretcher while we waited for an ER bed to open.  That ER is overwhelmed in (primarily) unvaccinated Covid patients.

She went on to need 5 units of blood.

After that, I went on a cardiac arrest. 39. Several children. Dropped suddenly in her kitchen; Covid positive. Suspicion is probably a Covid caused blood clot.  I looked her up on Facebook; hers was public and filled with anti-vax save my freedom rhetoric. Well, you chose your freedom, but now your kids are motherless.

Next call after that was a car accident. Probably not Covid.

Call after that was an elderly woman  who fell at home. Not injured, but needed help up. She was so afraid because her home health aide is usually there to help her in bed but no one had shown up. I called the agency and found out that aide called in, they were so short staffed due to people being out due to Covid and quarantine that they couldn’t find anyone for the night.  There was no family that could come.  She hasn’t been alone at night in years. The look in her eyes when I told her no one was coming was horrible. We helped her into bed and locked her doors. 

Patient after that was 47, Covid positive, dad of two. Wife is a stay at home, homeschooling mom. Unvaxxed.  I couldn’t get his O2 saturation above 74% even with all my tricks.  It was early early morning, but I had them wake up the kids.  I wanted them to say goodbye to Dad, because I don’t know that he’s coming home.

I posted on my Facebook yesterday a screen shot of the local cases and hospital capacity(lots of cases, no beds).  Immediately I had comments about why aren’t we using Ivermectin!!! They just want people to die!!! And lots about the shunning and discrimination against those who don’t vaccinate.

I may literally blast them back in my comments today, even though I usually believe it’s not worth it.

Your post made me cry.  Especially the elderly cancer patient and the elderly women who fell and couldn't get anybody to show up.  And all those children who are going to miss their parents because of their idiotic views.

[Bootsie]

32 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

When I worked as a cashier at PetSmart I had to wear a back brace. I never stocked shelves, but everyone there had to wear one. At the vet clinic, we couldn't keep a soda in the fridge with the vaccines. There was nothing in there that would hurt the soda nor would the soda hurt the vaccines, everything was sealed, but still can't have lunches or staff drinks in a fridge with medical supplies. That won't always make sense, but the overarching idea is that it prevents problems. Same with this, in most cases if you have a bunch of workers working together they are at risk of Covid transmission. Some places it won't make sense because everyone is spread out or working from home, but the idea makes sense. 

The idea does not make any more sense to me than the idea that because some workers need to wear a hard hat at Some places of employment a business should be fined if all of their workers are not wearing hard hats all of the time simply because they have 100 employees working somewhere.  

[TravelingChris]

4 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

The people I'm aware of who've had legit HBOC treatments (and by that I mean treatments offered by reputable medical facilities) are cancer patients who've developed osteonecrosis of the jaw as a side effect of their treatments (it's a relatively common SE). For some it seems to work well, although it takes many treatments. It seems to me it's become a very faddish thing now, though, and I'm very skeptical of how much validity there is for most of the claims. But I get that way anytime something is pushed as a treatment/cure for multitudes of conditions.

I know it is used in wound healing.  Also brain injuries= like concussions.

[Bootsie]

36 minutes ago, KSera said:

I think you are thinking of this as being always, or mostly a negative for the employer, but I don't think that's the case. It can really help an employer (and/or employees) when a policy like this is coming from higher up. My brother works for a large company that was having people quitting left and right as time to return to the office building approached, because of employee covid concerns. This vaccination requirement is hugely helpful to my brother and lots of his coworkers, because they feel better about returning to work with this in place, and fewer people are now quitting because of it.

If the employer has the right to require something, then a government mandate that fines them if they don't do something is not a benefit to them.  You are not adding options for an employer; you are taking options away from the employer.  

[TravelingChris]

4 hours ago, Spy Car said:

Just to be clear, my earlier comments criticizing the quack who is pushing Ivermectin and other scientifically-unsupported "cures" is apart from the separate issue of HBOC treatments (of which I have no reasoned position).

I do wish this forum was not used to advance the interests of a con-man.

Bill

But she didn't mention Ivermectin.  Was it the cytokine thing that made you think of that person?

[Bootsie]

44 minutes ago, Quill said:

They are not *making* anyone get vaccinated. They are saying, in order to work here, you have to be vaccinated. If you refuse to be vaccinated, you don’t work here anymore. 
 

It is the same as my son’s attendance at his college campus. If he wants to be on campus, he has to be vaxxed. If he didn’t want to be vaxxed, he has two options: take only virtual classes or transfer to a college without that requirement. Nobody is holding him down, injecting him against his will, but it’s mandatory as a condition of attending in person. 

I understand this.  And this is specifically to me what is wrong with using OSHA to try to get people to vaccinate.  It penalizes FIRMS for someone not doing something that the government wants them to do. The business's choice set is then to say "if you don't vaccinate you can't work here" (without the option of working remotely--because the OSHA regulation doesn't allow that as an exception) or pay a fine.  So, the business is either without workers (and can't operate) or the business is paying a fine because of an employee's behavior which the busienss cannot change. 

[Mrs Tiggywinkle]

12 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Your post made me cry.  Especially the elderly cancer patient and the elderly women who fell and couldn't get anybody to show up.  And all those children who are going to miss their parents because of their idiotic views.

I cried too today.

I almost never cry.  But I’m emotionally exhausted.  The surge will end, Covid will become endemic, life will someday go back to normal.  But I am really concerned about the toll it’s taking; not just death and disability, but moral injury for first responders and HCW, emotionally traumatized children, elderly people who are tired and scared. Caregivers like my mom who can’t get in home help for my grandmother. 
I didn’t post that whole rant for sympathy though it’s appreciated….but I was trying to illustrated that Covid has affected so many things for so many people. 

The good news is my mother agreed to consider the vaccine after I called her and cried for 20 minutes on the phone today. She asked which one I thought she should get since all 3 are available here, so that tells me she’ll probably get it.

[TCB]

31 minutes ago, SKL said:

That is a whole other topic and a distraction from what I was talking about.

I have always said I believe employers have a right to require things, although it may get iffy when it involves medical information, which is supposed to be protected by privacy laws.  It isn't a straightforward matter in any case, but employers should not lose rights they currently have.

I haven't read the anti-mandate legislation.  I don't necessarily trust the headlines as far as what the legislation actually requires/bans.  That said, I assume that to some degree, such legislation is a response to other authoritarian acts that [allegedly] go too far in the other direction.

I thought this would be your answer.

ETA It sounds like what is informing your position is your opinion and not a principle you believe in.

Edited October 13, 2021 by TCB

[Mrs Tiggywinkle]

6 hours ago, brehon said:

Just to add onto Mrs. T-W’s post — her patients’ profiles mirrors mine on any given shift. Even though numbers are trending down in my area, they are still considered very high. I’ve had the CPR call of a youngish man who died because he believed the hype against vaccines and for ivermectin. So, he drove on down to TSC and bought tubes of the stuff. Then he self-administered for 3 months prior to dropping dead. He was alive when we opened the front door and dead by the time we reached him in his recliner. Turns out that in addition to absolutely tearing your intestines up, livestock strength ivermectin also causes cardiac issues. Who coulda guessed that a livestock strength dewormer would have ill-effects on humans? (/sarcasm off) Also, turns out that there is a worse smell that the c-diff smell. It’s the smell of bowels destroyed by ivermectin.

ETA: Mrs. T-W and I live in completely different areas of the country. 

Totally different time zones.

But we have the same story, multiplied by how many other paramedics throughout the country? Based on some of the EMS Facebook groups I’m in, it’s all of us except in the few places that have reached about 70% vaccination.  
And we all have the same tragic horror story.  I will tell you…all the sh$t I’ve seen over the years—and I grew up going on calls with my dad, a volunteer fire chief EMT, so 40ish years of calls now—all of that pales to what I saw in that elderly lady’s eyes when I told her no one from her home health agency was coming. 
Covid affects so much more than we think.

(pS I did drive past the house a few times over night because it was close to the station and I was up on calls, and asked law enforcement to as well, just to give her some small reassurance)

[TravelingChris]

3 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I understand that OSHA does lots of stuff related to worker safety.  That's it's job.  My employer must provide me with a harness if I am doing certain types of jobs.  My employer needs to make sure that there are not cords I will trip over.  This is not about job-related worker safety.  Some employees must wear a hard hat because of their job situation; some employees must wear a harness because of their job situation.  I do not have to wear a harness and hard hat in my job.  Just because an employer has 100 workers does not mean those workers are at risk from contracting COVID from a coworker; it is not situationally based.  

Exactly.  My son works for a company that has only workers who work from home.  I have no idea if they require vaccinations or not- my son got his when it became available because he didn't want to get COVID nor give me COVID, etc.  But two things wrong with the mandates are - number one- even if your company hires over 100 people, if they aren't interacting physically with anyone or are all working outdoors, there is no reason to vaccinate.  Secondly- immunity should be considered just as good if it is just as good or better.  My dd2 has been vacced, was thinking she would get the third vaccine, but got sick.  Whether she had COVID this last time (she was tested 4 times all negative) or some previous time (she did have it in Dec), our doctor tested her for antibodies and she had super high antibodies last month.  She is not getting a third vaccine.  If someone never was vaccinated but had super high antibodies like my dd, they really should not be getting vaccinated and are as protected as the rest of us.

[Spy Car]

9 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

But she didn't mention Ivermectin.  Was it the cytokine thing that made you think of that person?

Not my first rodeo.

I know the doctor in question. And his cohorts.

They are engaging in flim-flam of the worst kind. Preying on the most desperate and the most vulnerable. Not a new development.

Bill

[TechWife]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

 

Why do you say an employer cannot make employees vaccinate? I thought that was established: yes they can. Also, semantically speaking, the wording I have heard is “voluntary termination.” So, if you won’t get vaccinated as required, you have quit, not been fired. 

 

3 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I think there is a big difference in an employer choosing to require a COVID vaccine for its employees and the government mandating that the employer require the vaccine.  

Using OSHA to charge fines to companies with more than 100 employees who have unvaccinated workers is problematic to me.  An employer cannot make employees vaccinate.  This is putting the penalty on someone who is not in authority to make a decision.  It unfairly burdens employers with 100 employees relative to the employer with 99 employees.  What is an employer supposed to do, fire all of their workers who don't vaccinate?  And then they can't operate?  Or, pay a fine and go out of business?  

This in no way addresses vaccine hesitancy among those who are retired, work for an employer with less than 100 employees, are in school, etc.  At this point, from what I understand the US government cannot require that people be vaccinated.  I see this as a round-about way to force some businesses to do what the US government doesn't have the authority to do and then fine those businesses and then fine those business if they are in compliance.  My thoughts on this are not only about whether the government should mandate vaccines, but also on the use of businesses to enforce a policy the government wants (but does not have the authority to implement).

Yes, the Federal government can most certainly require people to be vaccinated. In fact, they already do. In addition to the commonly cited requirements for military service, vaccine requirements been in place healthcare for decades. If a provider wants to treat Medicare and Medicaid patients, then the people that work and volunteer there must be vaccinated. No one is forcing people to vaccinate, but they are setting job requirements and it is perfectly legal to require vaccination as a condition of employment. 

Businesses enforce Federal, State & local policy every single day. That’s why work related accidents and deaths have decreased so dramatically when compared to earlier generations. It’s also why you aren’t as likely to get food poisoning when you eat at a restaurant. Business can be and are proactive in these areas, not because they want to be, but because they are made to be. If an employee refuses to wear a hard hat or steel toe shoes on a construction site or behaves irresponsibly with workplace equipment, their employer is responsible. Employers can be fined for not requiring their employees to follow the rules, their businesses can be closed and they can also held civilly liable for accidents that happen under their watch. Some have even been held criminally responsible for workplace accidents. 

Employers can’t force people to vaccinate, but they can refuse to employ or fire people who don’t, just as they can fire people for not following any other rule or condition of employment.

No vaccine? No job here. People are free to work at a smaller business  or start their own. 
 

 

[TravelingChris]

8 minutes ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle said:

I cried too today.

I almost never cry.  But I’m emotionally exhausted.  The surge will end, Covid will become endemic, life will someday go back to normal.  But I am really concerned about the toll it’s taking; not just death and disability, but moral injury for first responders and HCW, emotionally traumatized children, elderly people who are tired and scared. Caregivers like my mom who can’t get in home help for my grandmother. 
I didn’t post that whole rant for sympathy though it’s appreciated….but I was trying to illustrated that Covid has affected so many things for so many people. 

The good news is my mother agreed to consider the vaccine after I called her and cried for 20 minutes on the phone today. She asked which one I thought she should get since all 3 are available here, so that tells me she’ll probably get it.

Yes, I often cry for all the healthworkers, EMTS, etc.  You are my heroes. 

[TravelingChris]

I want all healthworkers to be vaccinated.  

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, TechWife said:

Employers can’t force people to vaccinate, but they can refuse to employ or fire people who don’t, just as they can fire people for not following any other rule or condition of employment.

No vaccine? No job here. People are free to work at a smaller business  or start their own.

Isn't this contrary to the policy that doesn't allow employers to overtly discriminate for health reasons, such as this person is obese, uses a wheelchair, or is a female of childbearing age who might want maternity leave?  Or to even ask health questions for that matter?

So if an employer decided to really cut healthcare insurance costs, could it make a requirement to be under XX BMI and fire everyone who doesn't comply?