CORONA Houston Methodist employees have until June 7 to get COVID-19 vaccine or they're fired

Houston Methodist will fire employees who don't get COVID vaccine | khou.com


Houston Methodist employees have until June 7 to get COVID-19 vaccine or they're fired

As of Friday, the hospital said 89% of employees have been vaccinated. They’re telling everyone else they must get the vaccine by June 7 in order to keep their job.



Author: Janelle Bludau
Published: 6:13 PM CDT April 23, 2021
Updated: 8:50 PM CDT April 23, 2021

HOUSTON — Some employees at Houston Methodist are upset over the hospital’s mandatory COVID-19 vaccine rule, saying they want more time.

As of Friday, the hospital said 89 percent of employees have been vaccinated, and they’re telling everyone else they must get the vaccine by June 7 in order to keep their jobs.

Houston Methodist employees have until June 7 to get COVID-19 vaccine or they're fired

It’s a decision Jennifer Bridges never thought she’d have to make: get the COVID-19 vaccine or lose her job.

“It’s not fair to be forced to inject something that we’re not comfortable with," Bridges said.

She knows her choice.

“I think our rights as human beings is more important than keeping that job. If I am blacklisted, whatever it takes. I will go find another form of employment," Bridges said.

As a registered nurse at Houston Methodist, she’s one of thousands of employees being told to get the vaccine by the hospital, or come June 7, she could be terminated.

“What they’re doing on June 7, is you’re suspended for two weeks and if you do not comply, you are terminated," Bridges said.
The hospital says it’s the same protocol as with the flu vaccine which was made a requirement back in 2009.

CEO Dr. Marc Boom calls the COVID-19 vaccine rule their “opportunity to keep leading medicine," and says by doing this, they are helping to stop the spread of this deadly virus. He says it is the employee’s obligation to keep their patients safe.

But Bridges says she’s not alone in her concerns. Since she’s gone public, she says hundreds of employees have reached out to her, and they feel the same.

“Basically, they’re either going to quit, get fired, and some have reached out to me literally crying, saying they’re going to hold off until the last day and take that shot against their will because they have to feed their family," Bridges said.
She says all they’re asking for is more time.

“Once the research is done in a couple of years, it’s fully FDA approved, then I am sure we will all line up and take it. Just not yet. Let us have more time," Bridges said.

But the hospital says that June 7 deadline is firm, and the vaccines have been shown to be very safe

So, all the highly trained medical people are forced to get the vax, and then perhaps develop the rumored "sponge brain,"
Imagine that.

Heck, I thought the Governor's ruling that the vaccine would not be forced on people would stop this from happening.

Well...there goes my premise. SHIT.

If this stands, it could well happen in all medical settings. Then likely universities and schools. We have family members employed in those locations, who have chosen not to take this vaccination.

We may have to start making room for the perhaps soon to be unemployed members of our family.

Does the Texas state government render any sort of subsidy to the Methodist Hospital system? If so, it should be suspended the moment the first employee is suspended.

TxGal said:

If this stands, it could well happen in all medical settings. Then likely universities and schools. We have family members employed in those locations, who have chosen not to take this vaccination.

We may have to start making room for the perhaps soon to be unemployed members of our family.

Click to expand...

My thoughts too, I'd be out on my ass and I'm not clinical. BUT, we have at least 50% employee's that won't take it, can't fire everyone, especially here. Considering the fact we have 1500 job openings I don't think anyone is going anywhere.

Government said they will not force, but cannot stop companies from doing it. Just like no shoes or shirt and no service.

With hospital systems all over the country begging for skilled employees it shouldn't be too hard to find a job in another hospital or traveling nurse/rent a nurse provider that doesn't have the requirement. Requiring an experimental vaccine for an illness with less than a 1% case fatality rate overall doesn't border on criminal but is criminal imo.

If everybody would walk off in all the hospitals that are doing this, it might not happen. They may even start refusing to allow people to be admitted to the hospital without the vaccine, or a dentist, or a walk-in clinic.

Mprepared said:

Government said they will not force, but cannot stop companies from doing it. Just like no shoes or shirt and no service.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but this is more like requiring an employee to eat certain foods sight unseen out of a paper bag to keep their job.

Lurker said:

My thoughts too, I'd be out on my ass and I'm not clinical. BUT, we have at least 50% employee's that won't take it, can't fire everyone, especially here. Considering the fact we have 1500 job openings I don't think anyone is going anywhere.

Click to expand...

I would hope the Executive Order would stop this, but I'm not sure right now:

Governor Abbott Issues Executive Order Prohibiting Government-Mandated Vaccine Passports | Office of the Texas Governor | Greg Abbott

Governor Abbott Issues Executive Order Prohibiting Government-Mandated Vaccine Passports
April 6, 2021 | Austin, Texas | Press Release

Governor Greg Abbott today issued an Executive Order prohibiting state agencies or political subdivisions in Texas from creating a "vaccine passport" requirement, or otherwise conditioning receipt of services on an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status. The order also prohibits organizations receiving public funds from requiring consumers to provide documentation of vaccine status in order to receive any service or enter any place.

"Everyday, Texans are returning to normal life as more people get the safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine. But, as I've said all along, these vaccines are always voluntary and never forced," said Governor Abbott. "Government should not require any Texan to show proof of vaccination and reveal private health information just to go about their daily lives. That is why I have issued an Executive Order that prohibits government-mandated vaccine passports in Texas. We will continue to vaccinate more Texans and protect public health — and we will do so without treading on Texans' personal freedoms."
View the Governor's Executive Order.

-----------------------------------------------------
ETA, this may only apply to 'consumers' and not employees...Oh just damn....and we are an 'at will' state.

Will the fired employee's be eligible for unemployment?

Government isn't really making anyone do anything. Private entities are requiring it to continue relations with them. Nobody is really required to take it, you just may not be able to work at the same place, or go to the grocery store, or receive medical treatment. Wouldn't be surprised to learn people start getting the shot without their knowledge if they're brought in to the ER unconscious.

Hfcomms said:

With hospital systems all over the country begging for skilled employees it shouldn't be too hard to find a job in another hospital or traveling nurse/rent a nurse provider that doesn't have the requirement. Requiring an experimental vaccine for an illness with less than a 1% case fatality rate overall doesn't border on criminal but is criminal imo.

Click to expand...

and i thought it was illegal for an employer to do this since it is an experimental shot.

greysage said:

Government isn't really making anyone do anything. Private entities are requiring it to continue relations with them. Nobody is really required to take it, you just may not be able to work at the same place, or go to the grocery store, or receive medical treatment. Wouldn't be surprised to learn people start getting the shot without their knowledge if they're brought in to the ER unconscious.

Click to expand...

They're enablers; Giving a nod and a wink.

hunybee said:

and i thought it was illegal for an employer to do this since it is an experimental shot.

Click to expand...

That's what I thought, as well. Even forcing employees to get the flu shot is ethically sketchy, but it is legal under the fig leaf that it isn't considered experimental.

Sue for discrimination!
What about people with allergies?
What about religious exemptions?
What about the fact that it is not FDA approved?

hunybee said:

and i thought it was illegal for an employer to do this since it is an experimental shot.

Click to expand...

Probably is - but that won't stop them - in the slightest.

That would be a big hurdle only if the justice system was not corrupt - and it is - totally.

i think it may be time to see who at the methodist system is getting any kickbacks for employee jabs.

as always, follow the money

A forced medical procedure... Joseph Mengele would be proud of them.

Since about 90% already have gotten the vaccine It might be just a scare tactic to get the last 10% on board.

However, I have heard of quite a few hospitals requiring it, but so far haven't seen it tested in court.
I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers out there who would take the case on a continency basis and 30% of whatever you may or may not win.

Anyway, each of us must follow our conscience in this matter.
Do what you think is right after leaning all you can about both options and the risks involved, and you will make the right decision for you.

"Not by the hair on my chinney chin chin."

Religious exemption and reasonable accommodation when possible (a challenge for medical staff):

Can Your Employer Force You to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine? (aarp.org)

Can Your Employer Require You to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine?
Workers have rights, but the answer is more complicated than you think
by Kenneth Terrell, AARP, Updated December 21, 2020 | Comments: 35



GETTY IMAGES

En español | With millions of people out of work and millions of others forced to work from home, the pandemic has reshaped the nation's labor force. And it's not done yet. As the unemployed look ahead to getting hired and remote employees prepare for a return to the workplace, many are contemplating the same question: Could they eventually be required to get a COVID-19 vaccination if they want to keep their jobs?

The question has become more urgent since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Pfizer and BioNTech’s coronavirus vaccine emergency use authorization on Dec. 11. The short answer: Yes. An employer can make a vaccination a requirement if you want to continue working there. But there are significant exceptions for potential concerns related to any disability you may have and for religious beliefs that prohibit vaccinations. And experts say that employers are more likely to simply encourage their workers to get immunized rather that issue a company-wide mandate.

On Dec. 16, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) confirmed that a COVID-19 vaccination requirement by itself would not violate Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). That law prohibits employers from conducting some types of medical examinations.

“If a vaccine is administered to an employee by an employer for protection against contracting COVID-19, the employer is not seeking information about an individual’s impairments or current health status and, therefore, it is not a medical examination,” the EEOC says.

But some employees may be exempted from mandatory vaccinations based on potential concerns related to any disability you may have and for religious beliefs that prohibit vaccinations. And experts say that employers are more likely to simply encourage their workers to get immunized rather that issue a company-wide mandate.

What workers can do
• Seek a vaccine exemption on medical grounds
• Seek a vaccine exemption due to religious beliefs
• Ask for alternative accommodations such as use of personal protective equipment, working separately or working from home

"Employment in the United States is generally ‘at will,’ which means that your employer can set working conditions,” says Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, who specializes in legal and policy issues related to vaccines. “Certainly, employers can set health and safety work conditions, with a few limits."

Those restrictions generally are tied to the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If employees have medical reasons or sincerely held religious beliefs that prevent them from taking a potential coronavirus vaccine, employers could be legally required to give the workers some reasonable alternative to continue to work, Reiss says.

The EEOC guidance notes that even if an employer finds that a worker who cannot be vaccinated due to disability poses a risk to the workplace, the employer cannot exclude the employee from the job — or take any other action — unless there is no way to provide a reasonable accommodation that would reduce this risk to others.

"That might be a [wearing a] mask, a working from home, or a working separately from other people alternative. As long as it's not too significant a barrier for the employer,” Reiss says. “If you can achieve the same level of safety as the vaccine via mask, or remote working, you can't fire the employee. You need to give them an accommodation."

Vaccine recommendations vs. requirements

The potential medical and religious accommodations are just two of the factors employers will have to consider when deciding whether to put a vaccination requirement in place. Experts say that given all the different concerns employers will need to balance with a potential COVID-19 vaccine, many might choose to simply recommend their workers get immunized rather than make vaccination a condition of employment.

For example, employers also need to weigh any liability issues a vaccination requirement might raise. Some federal lawmakers already have raised concerns that employers are vulnerable to lawsuits from workers and customers who might have contracted COVID-19 at the business. A mandate that all their employees get inoculated could complicate the risks for companies.

"It's a treacherous area for employers,” says Jay Rosenlieb, an employment law attorney at the Klein DeNatale Goldner law group in California. “The reason it's treacherous for employers is liability that arises from requiring a vaccine where the vaccine goes sideways and creates harm to the employee. That's going to probably be a workers compensation claim against the employer. And, of course, some kind of claim against the vaccine manufacturer. There's a lot of weighing that goes on here."

L.J. Tan, chief strategy officer for the Immunization Action Coalition — an advocacy group that supports vaccinations — says that because potential COVID-19 vaccines are largely being developed in the same manner as earlier vaccines, researchers have the benefit of past scientific experience to better ensure that a vaccine for this coronavirus will be safe. But he noted that the speed of the development of a COVID-19 vaccine — compressed into months rather than the usual years — and the politics that have accompanied it add to the reasons employers may be unwilling to make vaccination a requirement.

"One of the challenges we're going to be dealing with, obviously, especially now is that there is a shadow of politics over the vaccine,” Tan says. “As a result, there's some fear about whether the vaccine can be safe, whether it can be approved appropriately. Because of that shadow, I think it's going to be extremely difficult for an employer to make COVID-19 vaccination a condition of employment."

hunybee said:

and i thought it was illegal for an employer to do this since it is an experimental shot.

Click to expand...

Illegal PERIOD. Where are the religious exemptions? This is discrimination.

TxGal said:

“Basically, they’re either going to quit, get fired, and some have reached out to me literally crying, saying they’re going to hold off until the last day and take that shot against their will because they have to feed their family," Bridges said.
She says all they’re asking for is more time.

Click to expand...

The biggest concern I have here.

Lurker said:

Will the fired employee's be eligible for unemployment?

Click to expand...

Why not?

hunybee said:

and i thought it was illegal for an employer to do this since it is an experimental shot.

Click to expand...

Logic would say that but I have not seen a court case yet.

City Marm said:

Sue for discrimination!
What about people with allergies?
What about religious exemptions?
What about the fact that it is not FDA approved?

Click to expand...

Most likely left out of the article to force and agenda.

Why not? Because you refused a condition of employment, just as if you didn't show up on time regularly.

Keep in mind, if the employer doesn't approve the states inquiry on your leaving said employer - you don't get diddly.

Yes, it could be worked out in the courts but over years and by then you'll be dust. Plus I don't think you'll find a court willing to stand up for those that don't want the jab.

Well, I hear BK Lounge is hiring, mmm....free Whoppers.

TheSearcher said:

Yeah, but this is more like requiring an employee to eat certain foods sight unseen out of a paper bag to keep their job.

Click to expand...

Agree. Should be illegal and I think is.

TxGal said:

Can Your Employer Require You to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine?

Click to expand...

For a real FDA approved vaccine there are hoops you have to jump through however for an experimental vaccine issued under emergency authorization consent is required and full disclosure. The Nuremberg Code passed after the trial of the Nazi bigwigs after WWII ended are still in force.



NUREMBERG CODE (DIRECTIVES FOR HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION)

The Nuremberg Military Tribunal’s decision in the case of the United States v Karl Brandt et al. includes what is now called the Nuremberg Code, a ten point statement delimiting permissible medical experimentation on human subjects. According to this statement, humane experimentation is justified only if its results benefit society and it is carried out in accord with basic principles that “satisfy moral, ethical, and legal concepts.” To some extent the Nuremberg Code has been superseded by the Declaration of Helsinki as a guide for human experimentation.

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, etc

continued....



A competent group of lawyers would have a field day with this. They are doing medical experiments on a scale that would make Dr. Mengele green with envy.

i am curious what their justification for this would be.

almost 90% have already gotten it. i'm not going to go into if they were "influenced" in their getting it up to this point. but almost 90% have taken it.

it is experimental.

by all the manufacturers' own statements, it does not inhibit transmission, infection, or development of the illness.

it will not stop one from getting the illness.
it will not stop one from developing the illness.
it will not stop one from passing on the illness to others.

if this is the case, then what logical justification would a health organization have for making this compulsory?

Faroe said:

So, all the highly trained medical people are forced to get the vax, and then perhaps develop the rumored "sponge brain,"
Imagine that.

Click to expand...

creative people will figure out how to give each other shots of glucose

Work out BFYTW.

I suspect that a lot of employers, especially in the medical field are suddenly going to find employees lining up with "liability forms" for the employer to sign saying that they are requiring the shot for the continuation of employment and since it is now a requirement for work, the employer and their insurance company will be subject to workers-compensation law if anything goes wrong.

I'm not a lawyer, but I used to work in a State Worker's Compensation regulatory board, which was the agency that made sure employers had MANDATORY worker's comp insurance and also oversaw the insurance companies, the law changes, the appeals cases, etc.

I am pretty sure that even in "At Will" States (which Colorado was when I had that job) any employee required to have an experimental jab to retain their employment will have a pretty good worker's compensation case if they are injured as a result of the vaccine.

It would be fought tooth and nail, every case may be painfully slow and expensive, but it would only take one big "win" for the sharks to enter the water (sharks, in this case, being lawyers working on a no-win/no-fee basis).

But some big hospital corporations may back down if employees take action together with counter demands that their employers sign liability agreements or even mandates that taking the shot is work-related; especially if they have a friendly lawyer (often a family member) to write the thing up.

I don't know that this would work, but no one should be forced to take an experimental anything - and yes, an employer may be allowed to demand it for keeping a job, but then the employer has also just made it a part of the job and that carriers certain liabilities.

The nurses in this facility need to immediately band together, contact ANA and state that if one nurse is fired for refusing the shot, they all walk. ANA is the national nurses association and their position is that this cannot be mandated. If you really want to stir things up, start the unionization talk.

Lurker said:

Why not? Because you refused a condition of employment, just as if you didn't show up on time regularly.

Keep in mind, if the employer doesn't approve the states inquiry on your leaving said employer - you don't get diddly.

Yes, it could be worked out in the courts but over years and by then you'll be dust. Plus I don't think you'll find a court willing to stand up for those that don't want the jab.

Well, I hear BK Lounge is hiring, mmm....free Whoppers.

Click to expand...

"Well, I hear BK Lounge is hiring, mmm....free Whoppers."

Bartender position open in NY. ( Fast track to United States Congress. )

this requirement is the logical extension of "social justice" where the rule of law is suspended in favor of social "it is your shared responsibility"

Bryan/College Station is just up the road a piece from the Houston metro area..

Note the phrase, "at this point"..


Local hospitals say they’re not requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for employees at this point

A Houston hospital system announced Sunday they will require employees to be vaccinated

By Kendall Hogan
Published: Apr. 26, 2021 at 5:00 PM CDT|Updated: Apr. 26, 2021 at 11:30 PM CDT

BRYAN, Texas (KBTX) - This week, a hospital system in Texas announced they will require employees to be vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine or risk termination.

Houston Methodist Hospital announced Sunday that employees have until June 7 to be vaccinated. If they are not, they will be suspended for two weeks without pay, and if still not vaccinated, terminated.

Following the announcement, some hospital systems in the state said they may implement the same policy.

Here in the Brazos Valley, both Baylor Scott & White Health and St. Joseph Health say they are still highly encouraging vaccination but not requiring it.

St. Joseph Health sent the following statement to KBTX regarding this decision:

“St. Joseph Health is dedicated to creating a safe health care environment for our patients and employees. In keeping with that commitment, we believe vaccinations are important and we are strongly urging employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19, mindful of appropriate medical and religious exceptions, to protect themselves and the communities we serve.

We have undertaken extensive campaigns across our health system to encourage vaccination, and hundreds of our staff have received the vaccine. While we continue to offer vaccines to all employees, we are not currently mandating vaccination. We will continue to evaluate what is in the best interest of our patients and employees based on the latest science and recommendations by the CDC and FDA.”

Baylor Scott White Health in College Station sent the following statement to KBTX:

“Critical to our ability to delivering safe, quality care to the millions of patients who depend on us is the health and safety of our people. We are strongly encouraging all employees to receive the vaccine. We are offering employees the opportunity to consult one-on-one with a COVID-19 Vaccine Employee Health Nurse Navigator in a HIPAA-compliant manner to answer any questions or concerns they may have about getting vaccinated. Our navigator team will connect employees to the resources available to make an informed, educated decision that is appropriate for them.”

I almost said this is a perfect situation for REAL old-fashioned union activity, the sort that actually advocates for workers and serves a real purpose when individuals can't be as effective against a large employer as an organized group can be.

I know unions got a bad name in the 1980s when so many of the reasons they had formed in the early 20th century no longer existed so they morphed into something way beyond advocating an 8 hour day, 5 day work week, or even real equal pay for the same job.

But it is starting to look like "The Fourth Industrial Revolution" is coming up with its own ways to abuse and confuse its workers, so modern versions of Unions 2.0 may seriously need to be looked at.

Amazon's Union Busting activities may be just the start, with vaccine "requirements" when the only options in the US are an experimental technology and vaccine may be where things are headed.

Keep this up "Great Reset" people and look for Union Boss to be a term for hero again instead of a trouble maker with probable links to organized crime and a slush fund.

hunybee said:

i think it may be time to see who at the methodist system is getting any kickbacks for employee jabs.

as always, follow the money

Click to expand...

Although the vaccine manufacturers may have legal immunity, other entities may not.