And look what United Airlines is trying to pull...

[TBoneTX 43,418]

I got an e-mail about this:

 

https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/travel/your-shot-to-fly-sweepstakes.html?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=210524_UADL_22581_vaccineupload_C000022581&utm_source=Corporate Initiative_United_Announcements&utm_content=_ET01&launch_date=20210529&icid=3078034

 

Nowhere in there do I see that a HIPAA release form is required as part of the entry.

And yeah, right, they're not going to do anything else with the information.

Edited May 29, 2021 by TBoneTX

[laylalex 7,261]

Because HIPAA isn't relevant here? You're releasing your own information to United, which isn't a "covered entity" for HIPAA. If you're not interested in releasing that information to United, you don't have to. You just can't enter the contest.

 

There's a very good article about what HIPAA is and isn't on Recode from last month: https://www.vox.com/recode/22363011/hipaa-not-hippa-explained-health-privacy 

[TBoneTX 43,418]

And how reliable is United's assurance that the information won't be shared -- or, more feasibly, that the government won't swoop in and appropriate it?

[laylalex 7,261]

No one is forcing people to enter a contest. If people are uncomfortable with giving their vaccine status to a corporation, they can choose to sit this out. I don't understand why this is controversial in a free market economy. 

[LIBrty4all 3,749]

What United is doing is part of a multi-pronged approach to force people to get the vaccine:  https://www.wsj.com/articles/united-airlines-looks-to-require-employees-to-get-covid-19-vaccines-11611349963 

 

Just like Delta is already doing:  https://www.rt.com/usa/523877-delta-covid19-vaccine/ 

[laylalex 7,261]

Employers can require employees to be vaccinated, with exceptions for medical and religious reasons. If people do not like the terms of their employment, they can go to a competitor or move into another line of work. Isn't that what Republicans often say when workers claim they are underpaid or harassed at work -- go out and get a better job? 

[LIBrty4all 3,749]

40 minutes ago, laylalex said:

Employers can require employees to be vaccinated, with exceptions for medical and religious reasons. If people do not like the terms of their employment, they can go to a competitor or move into another line of work. Isn't that what Republicans often say when workers claim they are underpaid or harassed at work -- go out and get a better job? 

With a EUA-based drug?  Are you certain about that?

 

Covid is not an FDA-approved vaccine, it is an experimental drug at best.

[laylalex 7,261]

Yes, I am. There have been many articles about this over the past month.

https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/1001116485/for-employers-the-law-is-mostly-on-their-side-when-it-comes-to-vaccines

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/employer-requires-vaccinations-federal-legal-protections/story?id=77966575

https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeo-laws

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/employers-are-legally-permitted-to-4533400/

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/feds-say-employers-can-require-workers-to-get-covid-vaccine

https://www.wpri.com/health/coronavirus/can-employers-make-covid-19-vaccination-mandatory/

https://www.fsb-law.com/can-employers-require-employees-to-be-vaccinated-for-covid-19/

 

I could go on, you get the point. On the EUA point:

Quote

 

Among those who believe that EUA vaccines cannot be mandated, the best two arguments are a legal argument and a policy one. The legal argument is that the law setting out the requirements for emergency use authorization contains language requiring the Secretary of Health and Human Services to ensure that people know they can refuse or accept the vaccine. The same language requires the informational materials accompanying EUA vaccines to tell people that “It is your choice to receive” the relevant vaccine.

 

The policy argument against mandates is that the standards for emergency use authorization are lower than the standards for full approval, that the vaccines are “experimental” and not enough is known about them, and it is therefore unfair to mandate them. Two lawsuits have already been filed making both the legal and policy arguments, one by a corrections officer in New Mexico, and one by employees of the Los Angeles United School District.

 

There are good reasons to reject both of these arguments, though. On the legal side, the EUA statute says nothing directed at employers or universities. Instead, it addresses the actions of federal officials, such as the HHS secretary and the president — not private actors. Private employees are generally “at will,” meaning they can be terminated for any reason that is not explicitly illegal. Those arguing that the EUA statute prohibits mandates by at-will employers are claiming that this federal law is changing existing state employment law on the topic by mere implication. They are reading in a broad prohibition covering all employers and universities in the U.S. that is not, in fact, in the statute. Such broad preemption would require, at a minimum, clearer language.

 

https://www.statnews.com/2021/04/05/authorization-status-covid-19-vaccine-red-herring-mandating-vaccination/

Also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/05/04/vaccine-mandate-legal-schools-businesses/

 

And https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/lawsuit-challenging-school-district-s-3272280/:

 

Quote

 

What About The Language In The EUA?

The plaintiffs in this case believe they have the right the “refuse” the vaccine even if mandated by their employer. As noted, the FDA’s website says that the option to refuse is typically included in a “fact sheet” provided to the individual receiving the vaccine (or, alternatively, the party administering the vaccine can direct the individual to the weblink to view the fact sheet online). That fact sheet for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine can be found here, and it explicitly says that “the recipient or their caregiver has the option to accept or refuse [the] Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.”

But this directive seems to be targeted at whether an individual can be forced to take the vaccine by a government entity (as a New York lawmaker suggested several months ago), not whether an employer can condition an individual’s continued employment on taking the vaccine. After all, in at-will employment settings, an employee can always pursue alternative employment if they do not want to get vaccinated as a condition of their current job. Note that this analysis may be different in unionized settings governed by a collective bargaining agreement. The question in this case could come down to whether the court believes a public employer has the same rights as private employers in this regard.

 

 

 

[LIBrty4all 3,749]

Whatever happened to "MY body, MY choice"??  
 

Also, you may have missed it with the link above regarding Delta mandating a vaccine, but it only applies to new employees, not those already on property.  

Edited May 31, 2021 by LIBrty4all

[laylalex 7,261]

Whatever happened to the free market economy, where workers can choose to move their skills to organizations that have working conditions that they find tolerable?

[LIBrty4all 3,749]

3 hours ago, laylalex said:

Whatever happened to the free market economy, where workers can choose to move their skills to organizations that have working conditions that they find tolerable?

Your party.

[moxy 1,051]

5 hours ago, LIBrty4all said:

Your party.

I seriously doubt that. Word on the street is that laylalex parties are off the hook. Chex Mix, Izzies, that Velveeta queso in a Sterno pot, and highly competitive games of Twister. Laylalex parties are the stuff of legend.

[laylalex 7,261]

I'm not that cool!  I did have a mini-party the other week, if you can call it that, when we had a fully vaccinated friend stop by for some wine and pappardelle with a mushroom ragout, but she went home by 11. No Twister (not good in COVID times, never can be too safe).

 

What are Izzies?

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

2 hours ago, moxy said:

I seriously doubt that. Word on the street is that laylalex parties are off the hook. Chex Mix, Izzies, that Velveeta queso in a Sterno pot, and highly competitive games of Twister. Laylalex parties are the stuff of legend.

Shush!,  you had me at Chex mix with Velveeta!

[Crtcl Rice Theory 2,432]

11 hours ago, laylalex said:

Whatever happened to the free market economy, where workers can choose to move their skills to organizations that have working conditions that they find tolerable?

They should have moved with their feet before Biden took office.