Beer Virus V

[jamil]

I hope I don't either, but employers have been saying what an employee can put in their body for a long time. Including legal substances off the clock. I know one large company that has a nicotine ban, yes it's part of the random drug test. Test positive for nicotine and termination/no hire. Well I think they will hire, but retest after a certain period. If fail the retest, fired. I know another large company that salaried personnel cannot buy/give alcohol to an hourly employee.

The nicotine ban is for a couple of reasons according to the company, insurance costs and lost time due to illnesses are two of them. I could see the same argument made for requiring the vaccine.

I'm not saying I agree with it, just that IMO it's within their rights.

It may be within their legal rights now. I'm saying they have no moral authority/right. I can see it if it's an issue fundamental to their business model. A company whose in the drug cessation business might find it embarrassing if an employee was caught very publicly doing drugs, for example. If it's not fundamental to what they do as a business, they have no right to dictate what employees do on their own time.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Women getting pregnant account for a lot of missed work. The FMLA laws resulted from that. Would you agree that a company should be able to force its female employees to be on birth control?

Honestly? I could see it. But they aren't being "forced" it's a voluntary exchange. Yeah I know, if every company did it...

It may be within their legal rights now. I'm saying they have no moral authority/right. I can see it if it's an issue fundamental to their business model. A company whose in the drug cessation business might find it embarrassing if an employee was caught very publicly doing drugs, for example. If it's not fundamental to what they do as a business, they have no right to dictate what employees do on their own time.

I can agree. Completely.

And neither of those companies I mentioned had anything to do with drug/alcohol cessation. I would say nothing to do with them, except the one manufactures products that are used in the beverage industry including alcohol. That's the one that salaried can't buy/give a beer to an hourly employee outside of work. The nicotine one does lawn products.

 

[foszoe]

Women getting pregnant account for a lot of missed work. The FMLA laws resulted from that. Would you agree that a company should be able to force its female employees to be on birth control?

Absolutely

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Honestly? I could see it. But they aren't being "forced" it's a voluntary exchange. Yeah I know, if every company did it...

Absolutely

Wow... I've been transported to China or something. Is it really a voluntary exchange if you're forced to make the choice between earning a living and having a family? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you both (and I hope I am). And to Timjoebillybob, if every company did it, then it is in fact "forced" if you want to make a living and not suck off the government teat. And I'm not talking about the $15/hour "living" that some are seeking.

 

[foszoe]

Wow... I've been transported to China or something. Is it really a voluntary exchange if you're forced to make the choice between earning a living and having a family? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you both (and I hope I am). And to Timjoebillybob, if every company did it, then it is in fact "forced" if you want to make a living and not suck off the government teat. And I'm not talking about the $15/hour "living" that some are seeking.

Choices have consequences.

Now I may not be hard core about it, as in its not a core belief. Nor something I sit around contemplating.

I don't think I have a right to a living wage....I see this as similar.

Every company wouldn't do it.

Just like working from home.

The market place will decide

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Choices have consequences.

Now I may not be hard core about it, as in its not a core belief. Nor something I sit around contemplating.

I don't think I have a right to a living wage....I see this as similar.

Every company wouldn't do it.

Just like working from home.

The market place will decide

I would hope that every company wouldn't do it. But what if the companies that do it happen to be the only ones that one is qualified to work for? I mean, because McDonald's isn't requiring it for their line workers, should an IT specialist be required to take that job rather than the one that they went to school for and are most qualified for? At 1/4 of their current salary? What about a doctor or nurse that doesn't want to take the vaccine? They should flip burgers instead?

 

[foszoe]

I would hope that every company wouldn't do it. But what if the companies that do it happen to be the only ones that one is qualified to work for? I mean, because McDonald's isn't requiring it for their line workers, should an IT specialist be required to take that job rather than the one that they went to school for and are most qualified for? At 1/4 of their current salary? What about a doctor or nurse that doesn't want to take the vaccine? They should flip burgers instead?

I would argue I give women more credit.

Companies would recognize their value.

Just like McDonald's. I would argue they are recognizing the sentiment of the labor force required to do the job.

How many times have I said, not to you but others, take the job that pays the bills. No one owes someone anything based on their education and training.

Your labor is no more valuable than the next qualified candidate.

Same with doctors.

Choices have consequences

 

[Ark]

Is the state health department still doing any kind of following up, tracing, or other stuff on people who test positive? Or do you just get results and go on about your business?

 

[phylodog]

Choices have consequences

**** freedom.

Whoever has more money should be allowed to force anyone with less to put **** into their body.

I'm with Foz.

 

[printcraft]

I would argue I give women more credit.

Companies would recognize their value.

Just like McDonald's. I would argue they are recognizing the sentiment of the labor force required to do the job.

How many times have I said, not to you but others, take the job that pays the bills. No one owes someone anything based on their education and training.

Your labor is no more valuable than the next qualified candidate.

Same with doctors.

Choices have consequences

Who the **** said your (rhetorical you) choice get to trump my choice? FATWO with that noise.

 

[Ingomike]

For the college liberal, they may answer that question that way. How do you think they would answer "should a business be allowed to prohibit guns?".

Conservatives are on the wrong side? Do you consider yourself a conservative? If so do you believe that a baker should be required to bake and decorate a cake for a same sex couple? How about should a female beautician be required to wax another "woman's" meat and potatoes? I can come up with more examples if you would like.

I am way over absolutists...

Choices have consequences.

Now I may not be hard core about it, as in its not a core belief. Nor something I sit around contemplating.

I don't think I have a right to a living wage....I see this as similar.

Every company wouldn't do it.

Just like working from home.

The market place will decide

There is NO "market place".

 

[jsx1043]

 

[rooster]

I don’t think I’ve seen this discussed here or anywhere else for that matter. The Indian bar association served the chief WHO scientist a cease and desist in regards to suppression of ivermectin. Also threaten to being charges for every single person who has died since suppression started.

In order to stop Dr. Soumya Swaminathan from causing further damage to the life of citizens of this country, IBA has decided to initiate legal action against her and as part of the process, a legal notice has been served upon her.

https://indianbarassociation.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/IBA-PRESS-RELEASE-MAY-26-2021.pdf

 

[rooster]

Link to filings in Indian

https://indianbarassociation.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/HRSC-LETTER-TO-HONBLE-PRIME-MINISTER-OTHERS-COVID-19.pdf

 

[jamil]

I hope I don't either, but employers have been saying what an employee can put in their body for a long time. Including legal substances off the clock. I know one large company that has a nicotine ban, yes it's part of the random drug test. Test positive for nicotine and termination/no hire. Well I think they will hire, but retest after a certain period. If fail the retest, fired. I know another large company that salaried personnel cannot buy/give alcohol to an hourly employee.

The nicotine ban is for a couple of reasons according to the company, insurance costs and lost time due to illnesses are two of them. I could see the same argument made for requiring the vaccine.

I'm not saying I agree with it, just that IMO it's within their rights.

Okay. So what if the chamber-o-commerce pays companies to fire workers who aren’t vaccinated? Still okay? That would certainly create collective pressure for a de facto ban on behavior. Is that actually a free society? Couldn’t the c-o-c also reward companies for disallowing employees from owning guns? For driving gas guzzlers? Voting for candidates they don’t like? ****ing anyway but missionary?

 

[rooster]

Okay. So what if the chamber-o-commerce pays companies to fire workers who aren’t vaccinated? Still okay? That would certainly create collective pressure for a de facto ban on behavior. Is that actually a free society? Couldn’t the c-o-c also reward companies for disallowing employees from owning guns? For driving gas guzzlers? Voting for candidates they don’t like? ****ing anyway but missionary?

Capitalism and the worship of businesses to do whatever they want has allowed TPTB a work around for that pesky constitution.

 

[jamil]

Choices have consequences.

Now I may not be hard core about it, as in its not a core belief. Nor something I sit around contemplating.

I don't think I have a right to a living wage....I see this as similar.

Every company wouldn't do it.

Just like working from home.

The market place will decide

I used to have the same opinion: The market needs to figure these things out. Until it became apparent that the market can’t always figure things out. Business and labor are constantly trying to get the upper hand, by hook or crook. There is no such thing as a free market. The market, not just the labor market, is limited on things it can correct on its own.

I am of the mind that the market, to the extent it can correct, should be left alone to do so. But needs governed to the extent it can’t. Absolutism, in most things, is just ideological nonsense.

If most companies did it, the market can’t correct it, because there’s no effective market alternative. People will usually comply rather than risk their livelihood. So when it comes down to it, people will comply. If companies are being rewarded to **** employees, most will **** them. Business is business. Few people can just choose to quit and go work for the rare great places to work. There is just not a market fix for that.

 

[jwamplerusa]

Capitalism and the worship of businesses to do whatever they want has allowed TPTB a work around for that pesky constitution.

and this ^^^^ is why non-citizens (businesses, non-profits, NGOs, etc. - anything that is not an individual citizen who can vote and potentially serve) should be allowed no interaction with politicians, other than answering questions. No "donations", no PACs, nothing. Citizens have Rights, not organizations.

 

[jamil]

Capitalism and the worship of businesses to do whatever they want has allowed TPTB a work around for that pesky constitution.

Freedom is a balance when it comes to conflicting rights. And that’s what we have here. The right of people to decide what to put into their bodies, vs the right of employers to hire and fire for whatever reasons. I don’t think there’s a moral right for companies to require certain behaviors outside of work, unless it’s directly related to their business model.

It’s not capitalism that has allowed TPTB to work around the competition. It’s cronyism that’s done that. Capitalism is a free market economic system. Cronyism is not free market. Crony business relationships between companies and government cannot be corrected by markets. Crony labor relationships cannot be corrected by markets.

The problem with market absolutism is that it ignores crony behavior by business and labor, foolishly believing that the market can correct that, or worse, that business is business so who cares.

 

[jamil]

and this ^^^^ is why non-citizens (businesses, non-profits, NGOs, etc. - anything that is not an individual citizen who can vote and potentially serve) should be allowed no interaction with politicians, other than answering questions. No "donations", no PACs, nothing. Citizens have Rights, not organizations.

I agree here. Individual citizens have the exclusive power to vote. I wouldn’t say corporations shouldn’t be able to petition law makers (lobby) but they should not be able to contribute to political campaigns. That’s a law that would never be passed.

Politicians usually leave office richer than they entered. There is not a cushy job more secure than a Senator in a “safe” district. When’s the last time a Republican Senator was one-and-done in the state of Indiana? When has one ever retired worse off than when he started? No one’s gonna vote to **** up that gravy train.