[HN Gopher] New York's largest healthcare provider fires 1,400 u...
___________________________________________________________________
New York's largest healthcare provider fires 1,400 unvaccinated
workers
Author : dev_tty01
Score : 77 points
Date : 2021-10-04 22:12 UTC (50 minutes ago)
(HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
| orf wrote:
| That's nearly 2% of their workforce, at a place that I would
| assume would self-select for people who take vaccines seriously.
| I wonder what the unvaccinated % is for other industries.
| jopsen wrote:
| Does employees include administrative staff, janitorial staff,
| etc?
|
| Healthcare providers probably employ at lot of people who
| aren't nurses or doctors.
| tptacek wrote:
| It does.
| munk-a wrote:
| Yup it definitely does - but those people will more regularly
| rub shoulders with people engaged in actual patient care.
| Even the administrative positions should probably be treated
| seriously - and trying to break out exceptions (i.e. allowing
| unvaccinated people who are fully remote) can be difficult
| from an HR perspective and can expose you to unnecessary
| liability from both the patient side and from the HR side (by
| allowing more room for wrongful firing suits).
| beerandt wrote:
| Actual healthcare providers are likely contracted companies
| and/or workers, and not direct employee hires. Moreso for
| physicians and mid-levels, but sometimes nurses and techs, as
| well. (Although idk about the subject of this story,
| specifically.)
|
| Primarily educational institutions and 100% public hospitals
| are keeping physicians directly employed, and even some of
| them are now going the contract route.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >Healthcare providers probably employ at lot of people who
| aren't nurses or doctors.
|
| Hard to say for any particular provider. Some
| facilities/companies subcontract everything. Some don't.
| tptacek wrote:
| The losses are likely concentrated in support staff, both
| because of the educational correlation with vaccination and
| because relatively low-earning employees have a lot of
| employment options right now and perhaps not that much to lose
| by switching jobs.
|
| Also worth knowing is their annual employee turnover rates,
| which appear to be 8%, vs. 1.8% in this firing --- since that's
| not a RIF, it's likely those roles will quickly be filled
| (though at higher cost).
| iammisc wrote:
| Doctorates are the most likely to be unvaxxed though:
| https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/americans-with-phds-are-
| mo...
| tptacek wrote:
| Doctors (as in, medical doctors) have what looks like the
| highest vaccination rates in the country; nurses fall right
| in the sweet spot of the U-shaped distribution that article
| posits.
| stirlo wrote:
| Doctorates =/= Medical Professionals
| ghaff wrote:
| Somewhere in at least single digits isn't atypical for annual
| turnover. Yes, a lot of organizations will lose people who will
| probably have trouble finding equivalent jobs. But the
| organizations will manage.
| h2odragon wrote:
| If our healthcare system cannot or does not wish to serve us, it
| is time to take responsibility for our own health.
|
| Good start:
| https://store.hesperian.org/prod/Where_There_Is_No_Doctor.ht...
| tomrod wrote:
| I don't see the connection.
|
| COVID exists and makes people sick --> The best minds in
| medicine harness bleeding edge tech to create vaccine in record
| time --> vaccine gets tested, then distributed using crises
| management protocols established long before the pandemic -->
| vaccine uptake low due to right-wing propaganda
|
| Where did healthcare fail folks here?
| lrnyc21 wrote:
| Page 147 - " Vaccinations (lmmunizations)--Simple, Sure
| Protection"
| jopsen wrote:
| 1,400 out of 76,000 employees.
| po1nt wrote:
| >2% death rate
| pessimizer wrote:
| They should do cops next. 95% of the Chauvin types are also anti-
| vaxxers. Union leadership would be decimated if only pro-vax cops
| were left.
| codevark wrote:
| Heard a clip of a 60-something nurse saying that she's getting a
| "monoclonial [sic] antibody" treatment, but she didn't get the
| vaccine because "all those side effects that's been proven".
|
| I do not want this nurse at my bedside.
| evanextreme wrote:
| from an operational security standpoint i find it hard to argue
| that workers in the healthcare industry should be able to refuse
| something which significantly reduces their risk of being a
| vector for a harmful disease and transmitting it to those who
| have a higher likelihood of having pre existing conditions
| rajin444 wrote:
| > significantly reduces their risk
|
| I don't see how this statement is true without considering
| prior infection.
| joelbondurant wrote:
| Communist clown show.
| zzzeek wrote:
| this is an intentionally inflammatory headline and all of the
| news providers have been doing them.
|
| the correct headline should be: "New York's largest healthcare
| provider reaches 98% vaccination for entire staff, with help from
| mandates, leading to vastly improved patient and staff safety"
| hapless wrote:
| I don't think it will surprise anyone to hear that Northwell is
| based on Long Island.
|
| Other hospital systems were not obliged to fire so many staff.
| thepasswordis wrote:
| Is this really the behavior of a hospital system on the brink of
| collapse due to an ongoing pandemic? Really?
|
| I'm meant to honestly believe that the hospital system is on the
| brink of collapse, and that you are now _firing_ 1400 workers who
| have been the ones keeping it going for the last 20 months?
|
| I think this might be my "yeah, the pandemic is officially over"
| moment. You don't _fire the freaking healthcare workers_ in a
| time when you supposedly need them desperately.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| A lot of people are providing logical responses. But don't
| forget that fundamentally even if what you say is true, it is
| in no sane universe a valid excuse not to fire these people.
|
| "We're facing a terrible teacher shortage so we can't fire the
| ones who abuse the kids just a little bit."
| thepasswordis wrote:
| >"We're facing a terrible teacher shortage so we can't fire
| the ones who abuse the kids just a little bit."
|
| That is an absolutely _absurd_ comparison.
| pawelmurias wrote:
| We're facing a terrible teacher shortage so we can't fire
| those who refuse to teach evolution"
|
| Firing unqualified idiots is always an excellent choice.
| akudha wrote:
| Not saying firing is the best course of action, but they're
| endangering others, so what choice do you have at this point?
| Vaccine has been available for months and it is free (while
| other countries are begging for it). We've asked nicely, tried
| educating, mandating, pleading ... there are still people who
| refuse to vaccinate.
|
| I don't know what the answer/solution is. But nobody has the
| right to put others at risk.
| AutumnCurtain wrote:
| They employ over 75,000 people, so 1,400 is not the shocking
| total it might seem. They also are not necessarily all in
| patient care roles.
| lmilcin wrote:
| If they are not in patient care they are around people who
| are.
| 0des wrote:
| I have heard remarks like this before in the restaurant
| industry. Like with dish-staff, even the Janitor is a
| critical role, doing an essential task that no other will do.
| munk-a wrote:
| It sucks - I wish these people didn't need to be let go -
| if only they had been warned repeatedly about the
| consequences of not getting the vaccine (to their health
| and their jobs), been given clear evidence on efficacy from
| trusted sources and hadn't bought into bullshit they read
| on facebook.
| stirlo wrote:
| > Like with dish-staff, even the Janitor is a critical
| role, doing an essential task that no other will do.
|
| Easy to hire and train new janitors and dish-staff
| tptacek wrote:
| Sure you do, if they're relatively low-skilled and
| straightforwardly replaceable, and they're endangering the rest
| of the staff by refusing to comply with health and safety
| requirements.
|
| This is 1.8% of their workforce. Their normal annual turnover
| is 8%.
| beervirus wrote:
| > endangering the rest of the staff
|
| Where did this idea come from that we vaccinated people need
| to be protected from the unvaccinated? That's what the
| vaccine is _for_, protecting us from the unvaccinated. And
| it's good at its job!
| AdamHominem wrote:
| Please educate yourself on herd immunity.
| beervirus wrote:
| Delta is so transmissible that herd immunity is no longer
| achievable even with 100% vaccinated.
| kitkat_new wrote:
| it's not black & white
| neither_color wrote:
| Which edition of herd immunity, the early 2020 or 2021
| definition? It's a moving target you see...
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20201101161006/https:/www.who
| .in...
|
| https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-
| disease...
| munk-a wrote:
| It is a moving target because yes - we don't (as a
| society) have a ton of practice with worldwide pandemics.
| Information evolves and our expert's interpretation
| evolves with it. If you reject opinions from everyone who
| has ever changed their mind after receiving more
| information you'll be left with one or two ridiculously
| lucky people and a who bunch of stubborn morons who
| simply reject the notion that their past selves might
| have been incorrect.
| lloydgrossman wrote:
| ...? The vaccine isn't a panacea that eradicates the virus.
| Vaccine means your viral load is going to be lower than the
| alternative and less likely to spread. You can be
| vaccinated and still spread the virus, but getting the hogs
| to stop running around so we can try and achieve herd
| immunity for those that aren't able to get the vaccine is a
| pretty obvious goal.
| beervirus wrote:
| It reduces your risk of serious illness to the point of
| irrelevance. If you're vaccinated, you're not quite at
| zero risk, but you're close enough that the pandemic is
| over for you.
|
| And delta is so transmissible that herd immunity is no
| longer achievable even with 100% vaccinated.
| woodruffw wrote:
| > And delta is so transmissible that herd immunity is no
| longer achievable even with 100% vaccinated.
|
| There is ample evidence that suggests the exact
| opposite[1].
|
| [1]: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2106757
| beervirus wrote:
| That article isn't about herd immunity.
| munk-a wrote:
| It doesn't reduce risk to irrelevance - there can still
| be some serious consequences - and the more unvaccinated
| people we've got around the more likely we're going to
| see even more variants which may bypass the efficacy of
| the vaccine and force us back into full lock downs.
| hanniabu wrote:
| > It reduces your risk of serious illness to the point of
| irrelevance.
|
| For the most part, and if you're healthy. Unfortunately
| in a hospital you're working with people that are
| vulnerable.
|
| Why is this such a controversial thing anyways? In the
| past we've made vaccines mandatory.
| TrevorJ wrote:
| >if they're relatively low-skilled and straightforwardly
| replaceable
|
| narrator: "they aren't".
| AdamHominem wrote:
| What qualifies you to speak on the subject?
|
| What makes you more qualified than the people who actually
| have professional education, training, and experience in
| running a hospital?
| reedjosh wrote:
| Yes, how dare he have an opinion on the matter!?
| lmilcin wrote:
| "Kemp said the terminations will have no impact on patient
| care at Northwell's 23 hospitals and other facilities."
|
| Personally, I think populations where people are _all_
| vaccinated will be much less likely to be virus hotspot. I
| think reducing that risk alone might be worth it, even if
| looking from a purely financial point of view.
|
| Of course that doesn't matter. People who come to hospital
| are frequently not in good health. It is pretty
| unconscionable to additionally endanger them unnecessarily
| by having people around who will willingly put them in
| jeopardy just because they don't want to get vaccinated.
|
| It is in the name "Health. Care." If you don't _care_ about
| somebody's _health_ you don't belong in _healthcare_.
| tptacek wrote:
| I took the time to look up the employee turnover rate at a
| regional health care provider in order to write my comment.
| Can I ask that you expend at least that much effort (it's
| not much!) to support your claim with evidence?
|
| My argument might be more subtle than my comment makes it
| seem; if so, that's my fault, because I wrote downthread as
| well and probably assumed people read both comments. A very
| large cohort of the workers in a regional health chain are
| not medical professionals, but rather support staff.
| _Those_ are the employees that I 'm saying are relatively
| low-skilled and replaceable. What's more, our current
| economic conditions make it straightforward for them to hop
| to other jobs right now.
|
| What you're saying seems pretty unlikely, given the
| demographics of vaccination.
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| > _they 're endangering the rest of the staff by refusing to
| comply with health and safety requirements_
|
| They're not though, the vaccines reduce spread very
| marginally if at all. To say nothing of the huge proportion
| of these nurses who have natural immunity.
| [deleted]
| woodruffw wrote:
| We have ample evidence that the current vaccines reduce
| COVID's spread[1].
|
| [1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| lol an article from July 27 just before the Provincetown
| study came out
| munk-a wrote:
| Please link your sources and highlight the relevant
| information.
| woodruffw wrote:
| I don't know what the Provincetown study is, but see
| above for up-to-date evidence that vaccines continue to
| be effective at reducing transmission.
| iammisc wrote:
| Hold on hold on... this article makes the claim you're
| trying to show, but then immediately backtracks on the
| currently most-spreading strain.
| woodruffw wrote:
| They don't "backtrack." Nature is a scientific
| publication, so they don't make claims before the
| evidence supports them. The article is from July, before
| we had strong evidence of the vaccine's effectiveness at
| reducing transmission agains the Delta strain.
|
| Here's a research summary from last month[1] that shows
| that vaccines _continue_ to perform strongly at
| transmission reduction.
|
| Edit: A direct link to the NEJM study (9/8/21) showing
| reduced transmission[2].
|
| [1]: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-
| perspective/2021/09/covid-va...
|
| [2]: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2106757
| iammisc wrote:
| Yes, they did backtrack. They said the vax prevents COVID
| spread. Then in the next phrase said.. but we don't know
| about Delta yet. At the time of publication, delta was
| the most commonly spreading variant. That means they made
| a claim 'the vax prevents COVID spread' that had an
| unknown truth value at the time, especially in the
| context of contemporaneous events.
|
| The second link you provided is actually relevant.
| Thanks.
| woodruffw wrote:
| I think it's a remarkable stretch to frame responsible
| editing ("the current evidence suggests reduced
| transmission with vaccination, but there's a confounding
| unknown") as "backtracking."
| tomrod wrote:
| Usually I would respond with a scientific source to correct
| your claim. However, since that has already been added to
| comments, I am really curious. How did you arrive at your
| current conclusion?
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| A CDC prison study of a Delta variant outbreak showing an
| attack rate of 93% on unvaccinated inmates & staff versus
| 89% for those vaccinated more than 4 months prior:
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7038e3.htm
|
| Another example of a major outbreak in a 96% vaccinated
| and high PPE setting: https://www.eurosurveillance.org/co
| ntent/10.2807/1560-7917.E...
|
| No relationship between case rates and vaccination across
| 68 countries: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s
| 10654-021-00808-7
| tomlockwood wrote:
| From my local area:
| https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/unvaccinated-
| patie...
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| I don't dispute that the vaccines may be effective in
| reducing hospitalizations & deaths from Covid but that's
| a separate question from whether and how much they reduce
| transmission.
| tomlockwood wrote:
| https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/covid/covid
| -19...
| woodruffw wrote:
| The healthcare system in this country is multifaceted, and has
| multiple points of failure. We've seen most (if not all) of
| them at various points: a lack of PPE, insufficient respirators
| and ICU beds, a lack of staffing, &c. _Each_ of those is a
| sufficient condition for describing the system as "on the
| brink of collapse."
|
| As others have pointed out, those 1400 workers were also not
| necessarily essential medical personnel. All other things being
| equal, Joe in Billing is more likely to be resistant to getting
| his shot than Susie in Immunology.
| FormerBandmate wrote:
| Also, the worst of the Delta variant is over, and New York
| was never as much of an area under strain as red states were
| post-vaccination
| pama wrote:
| I keep my fingers crossed that the worst of Delta is indeed
| over for NYC, but I don't feel more than 50% confident.
| Last winter NYC experienced a huge surge before the
| introduction of new variants. I hope the vaccines, booster,
| and upcoming child vaccination will help this time around,
| but it is hard to predict or control this disease.
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| That was just a matter of seasonality, and a quirk where
| the southern states which tend to be the least vaccinated
| also have late summer respiratory virus surges. Highly
| vaxxed Vermont has been experiencing a major surge, we
| might expect the same in New York although they might have
| a much higher proportion of naturally immune.
| beerandt wrote:
| Southern states stay inside in the summer.
|
| Northern states stay inside in the winter.
| woodruffw wrote:
| You're going to pass the last few months off on
| _seasonality_? That strains credulity.
| unyttigfjelltol wrote:
| So why the need to fire 'Joe from Billing', who has been
| working diligently from home for the last 18 months? Folks
| don't contract COVID by Internet.
| xjlin0 wrote:
| When I visit hospital I have to get or pay bills (providing
| by their billing staff) on site before procedures. Also
| emergency happened everyday, even billing or any staff many
| need to do on-site work if network is done. Checked
| facebook today?
| woodruffw wrote:
| > So why the need to fire 'Joe from Billing', who has been
| working diligently from home for the last 18 months? Folks
| don't contract COVID by Internet.
|
| I've been working from home too, but that doesn't stop me
| from going to the bar on the weekends (I'm not sure about
| where you live, but in NY they've been open for months).
|
| And to point out the obvious: at some point, Northwell is
| going to want Joe to return to the basement of whatever
| hospital his billing department is in.
| munk-a wrote:
| Creating exceptions like this might allow you to retain
| some portion of these employees but it will complicate
| rules around employee interaction (Sorry Joe - you're not
| allowed to attend the employee picnic this year) and open
| the company up to liabilities from both the patient and HR
| side that are unnecessary dangerous. Additionally, the more
| carveouts you add the more likely you're going to get a
| wrongful firing suit.
| reidjs wrote:
| They may be more concerned about the potential of it
| spreading to their other employees. People occasionally
| associate with their coworkers physically outside work
| (e.g., happy hours, coffee, lunch, etc). Even if they are
| mostly working from home, they present a risk to the other
| employees.
| tomrod wrote:
| Because Nancy in Nursing might need to go to Joe from
| Billing's office to discuss a payroll discrepancy,
| whereupon Nancy in Nursing becomes a potential carrier,
| infecting Paul the Pediatric Patient.
| cma wrote:
| While they aren't perfect, the vaccines do drop transmission
| rates. Why would they want more contagious people handling the
| elderly and immune compromised, or, even if they just relegated
| the unvaccinated to handling the young and healthy, spreading
| it more through the hospital system ultimately reaching elderly
| and immune compromised patients?
| ghaff wrote:
| >Is this really the behavior of a hospital system on the brink
| of collapse due to an ongoing pandemic?
|
| I hope so. When better to fire workers who won't comply with
| safety protocols than in an "ongoing pandemic"?
| nojito wrote:
| What is this logic?
|
| NYS implemented a mandate for all healthcare organizations to
| follow.
|
| Deadline was end of September and all organizations followed
| through on it.
| Covzire wrote:
| Especially when a lot of them have caught COVID and have anti-
| bodies against it.
|
| The number of lies (and censorship) being used to sell this
| mandate is pretty shocking. This won't end well for Democrats
| in 2022.
| travoc wrote:
| I'm afraid to ask why having antibodies from a previous Covid
| infection isn't as good or better than taking the vaccine.
| mullen wrote:
| Because you don't take a chance in dying if you get the
| vaccine but you do if you catch COVID. Also, you spread
| COVID when you get COIVD, you don't spread COVID when you
| get the COVID vaccine.
| Covzire wrote:
| Wrong, you do take a chance getting the vaccine. The
| media and SV have been instrumental in keeping that fact
| from most of the public but the risks are very real. The
| benefits are also far less than originally hoped, we're
| seeing ICUs all around the world filling up with "fully
| vaccinated" people.
|
| The risks are unknown, the benefits are unknown, the
| censorship and group-think is real though. Fuck that, I
| won't be getting any of the current vaccines, I'll go
| homeless and defecating on the streets of SF before I
| allow any of the current Pfizer, J&J or MOderna jabs into
| my own body. Novavax looks a lot more promising, so if
| safety data for it isn't censored by the media and social
| media including Youtube, I'll gladly get one.
| beerandt wrote:
| Doesn't excuse firing people who have already had it.
|
| Regardless of whatever the argument is about those who
| haven't had it.
| polartx wrote:
| Broad strokes paint outside the lines.
|
| For a large portion of the population, COVID isn't a
| death sentence. I had COVID not long ago and it was like
| every other flu I've ever had--aches, lethargy, over in 3
| days. I didn't even know it was COVID (instead of a
| normal flu) until my sense of smell was gone. (Back a
| week later)
| GaryTang wrote:
| The problem is if you can get natural immunity
| independently, how can you be dependent on the government?
| Reduced dependency for vaccines and healthcare will reduce
| the need for government intervention and reduce the
| justification for increased taxes and regulations.
| xjlin0 wrote:
| There are many cases people get covid more than once, even
| some congressman I think.
| willcipriano wrote:
| I think it's mainly ego at this point. The establishment
| said that herd immunity won't work, accepting that those
| who already have the disease are as immune as those with
| the vaccine would be in effect admitting they were wrong.
| bigodbiel wrote:
| Because the CDC insists on PCR-positive nonserovonversion
| cases as proof that previous infection does not guarantee
| antibodies.
| zeptonix wrote:
| Sending an upvote before all the downvotes come piling
| in...
| aaomidi wrote:
| Would you hire a carpenter that didn't believe in nails?
|
| Or a software engineer that didn't believe in binary?
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| That's a pretty poor analogy. Nails are often the right and
| often the wrong tool for different circumstances. And there
| are different kinds of nails. Lots of carpenters have
| preferences for what types of hardware they use - based on
| their own experience and that of experience from others. And
| even if I disagreed with a carpenter on what tools were right
| for any given particular circumstance, it would be silly to
| try to micromanage them doing their job - just let them do
| their work!
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| I can see "nails vs screws" ending in a brawl if enough
| alcohol is served beforehand. The first punch would
| probably be thrown after the clipboard warrior makes some
| quip about dovetails and other "fastener free" joints and
| gets everyone riled up.
| rajin444 wrote:
| Unfortunately vaccine efficacy is something almost nobody can
| verify on their own so trust is required.
|
| The real question is: why do you trust people that they
| don't?
| MarkLowenstein wrote:
| They're probably like me. I know the vaccine helps. I also
| know that I have near-zero risk from COVID. So I don't get
| the vaccine because I don't like injecting unnecessary stuff
| in there.
| bigodbiel wrote:
| Or they got it already, and equally or better protected
| than by vaccination.
| jaas wrote:
| It's not all about you. Unvaccinated people are more likely
| to infect others. Stop being selfish and get vaccinated.
| literallyaduck wrote:
| I'd say this is more akin to taking a software beta. Prior to
| a few months ago it was still experimental and in alpha. The
| software was rushed to market and you have no recourse if it
| bricks your system. The vaccine mandate is similar to forcing
| only trusted users on your network. Now you have created a
| catch 22 because any dissenters have been removed from the
| health care system.
|
| Don't take this as a request not to be vaccinated, but
| rushing has created some very bad problems in the past:
| https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/cancer/in-
| dep...
| iammisc wrote:
| > Or a software engineer that didn't believe in binary
|
| If using binary may incur a chance of heart failure and blood
| clots, yes, I'd be sure to hire a software engineer who
| didn't do that.
| epistasis wrote:
| What are you talking about here? Could you provide some
| documentation?
| iammisc wrote:
| https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/patient-safety-
| outcome...
|
| https://nypost.com/2021/03/15/italy-france-germany-pull-
| astr...
|
| https://nypost.com/2021/10/04/twitter-criticized-for-
| fact-ch...
|
| For me personally, I don't know anyone who's died of
| COVID, but I know two people who had complications from
| the vaccine, including my aunt who was already in fragile
| health and who was sent to the hospital due to
| myocarditis, and then told not to get shot number two.
| She's already partially disabled because of her health
| problems, but because of government mandate that requires
| she be 'fully vaccinated' (i.e., dead in her case) she
| can also no longer work any job. Thanks Joe Biden!
| stickfigure wrote:
| A better comparison would be a software engineer who
| refuses to patch his out-of-date operating system because
| he's "not sure what the updates will do".
| beerandt wrote:
| As opposed to installing every published patch, without
| internal testing, whether the patch is needed/applicable,
| or not?
| aaomidi wrote:
| How about unvaccinated staff pose a risk to patients who
| are in the hospital and likely immunocompromised?
|
| I agree if they fired people wfh that was stupid, but for
| doctors and nurses? Yeah they are a liability for other
| patients.
| bobthechef wrote:
| Very poor comparison that misrepresents their motives.
|
| None of these people opposes vaccines. They either don't
| accept THIS vaccine, esp. how politicized it has become, and
| they don't accept being force do take it.
| orf wrote:
| Who politicised it and why? And when you say THIS vaccine,
| which one?
| munk-a wrote:
| At least when it comes to the US - these vaccines have been
| strongly embraced by major figures in both political
| parties. They were mostly developed and rolled out
| initially under Trump and have been continued under Biden -
| so both sides of the aisle would really like you to get it.
|
| I'm in Canada and my spouse had some concerns about AZ when
| it was first being rolled out in pharmacies by booked
| appointments - so I waited until the national rollout of
| Pfizer & Moderna - if you've got concerns over a specific
| version of the vaccine there are other options.
| nobodyandproud wrote:
| That is the reaction of a child. Not an adult working in a
| critical service.
| lamassu wrote:
| As an emergency physician, good riddance to bad garbage. If
| they haven't learned anything in the last 20 months then they
| deserve to go.
| libx wrote:
| Your profession is a big fraud. Big fraud that is dismantled
| with knowledge, not the supposed one that you and your
| colleagues get brainwashed at the universities. Check where
| 'alumni' comes from. Check why you dress in black at
| universities. Check how your "medicine" was founded. Check
| who owns the pharmaceuticals, and by the way, all other giant
| multinationals. Check who does the supposed scientific
| research. Check where does the new religion of scientism
| comes from.
|
| If you check all these, we'll come to the conclusion that the
| bad garbage is inside the heads of so many that believe in
| the system. Then you'll begin to feel that this "medicine" is
| killing many, many people that could be saved.
|
| Those who believe that: a) is better to put some mask instead
| of breathing air and inputting oxygen into the body; b) is
| better to "stay at home" imprisoned instead of walking
| outside and taking sun; c) is better to be injected, as much
| as possible, with so many poisons instead of eating healthy
| (not by your "medicine" standards for sure), have good
| emotions and improve the immune system.
|
| I have some news to you: You are very very ill... from your
| heads!
| richrichardsson wrote:
| Can someone please flag this garbage?
| AdamHominem wrote:
| As a possible patient, good riddance as well. These people
| clearly don't believe in science and/or they don't believe in
| trusting experts and following their instructions.
|
| That's the last person I want anywhere near me. Especially if
| they're nurses. I've run across a lot of nurses who think
| they know better than doctors, and this seems like a
| fantastic way to weed them out.
|
| How much you want to bet "accidental" deaths go down after
| this?
| Etheryte wrote:
| Healthcare workers are at the highest risk of contracting
| disease and spreading it to others. There are numerous reported
| cases where unvaccinated healthcare workers have transmitted
| illness to patients who had been brought in with other
| ailments, in a number of cases with fatal outcomes. Firing a
| very small part of your workforce who carries a very large risk
| makes perfect sense.
| seaman1921 wrote:
| > firing 1400 workers who have been the ones keeping it going
| for the last 20 months
|
| The fact that they kept it running doesn't mean they actually
| run the place now and can do as they wish. I only hope that the
| severance is good and reflects their contribution well, but
| they Northwell is well within their rights to require
| vaccination in their workplace now.
| bobthechef wrote:
| What percentage of them are black or Hispanic?
|
| Many healthcare providers in NYC, including companies like
| Northwell, are staffed with black and Hispanic workers who have
| much higher rates of refusal to be vaccinated.
|
| If these workers are disproportionately black or Hispanic
| workers, then this would appear to be a textbook example of
| systemic racism. This is certainly the view of BLM who has
| expressed this view w.r.t. the mandate.
| iammisc wrote:
| This is systemic racism, and like most _actual_ examples of
| systemic racism (as opposed to the completely trivial number of
| black men that are killed by police each year), this one is
| widely supported by most liberal whites, who, yet again, have
| completely ignored minorities after supposedly elevating our
| voices for the past year. What a joke. We should start teaching
| Malcolm X in school.
| 0des wrote:
| > If these workers are disproportionately black or Hispanic
| workers, then this would appear to be a textbook example of
| systemic racism
|
| Does every incidence of disproportional representation indicate
| systemic racism, or is there some context lacking here?
| zzzeek wrote:
| This seems like a bad faith argument. Black and Hispanic
| workers are free to choose to get vaccinated just like anyone
| else and there are no barriers to them doing so, and it's not
| unreasonable that POC who work for a hospital would be held to
| the same standards as any other employee. "Racism" applies to
| things that can't be changed, like skin color or national
| heritage.
| twa999 wrote:
| a normalization of a papers please policy in everyday life will
| have lasting consequences for which demands companies make on
| their workers will be perceived as normal and how politics and
| unions will handle this.
|
| My current feeling is that sooner or later this will collapse and
| burn in whatever form. this rapid downward spiral this country
| has been in for the last few years is not sustainable for much
| longer..
| po1nt wrote:
| Grab a marshmallow brother, it's all up in flames.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| Where is the discussion about the fact that a very large fraction
| of these employees likely already had far superior natural
| immunity - which is provable. So they were fired for refusing to
| undergo what amounts to an unnecessary medical procedure. And
| these vaccines are non-sterilizing - so it's not like other
| vaccinations that are routinely required in other public health
| contexts.
| lrnyc21 wrote:
| To be in certain healthcare settings you're often required to
| be vaccinated against some diseases e.g. if you're going to be
| part of surgeries you need to get a TB vaccine. That's a public
| health measure and this is no different.
| Cerealkiller050 wrote:
| This is the one thing I just don't get. I check the news
| everyday to see if the U.S. government has clarified the
| natural immunity part. The amount of research on it seems good,
| and other countries already acknowledge it and use it.
|
| Why??
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| The only reasoning that makes sense at this point is that the
| US Government doesn't care if you have natural immunity. They
| want you to do as they say or suffer.
| bastawhiz wrote:
| "Provably" is doing a lot of work here. Could they screen each
| of the employees for immunity? Yes. And the cost of that would
| be high, and you wouldn't get results back for two weeks or
| more.
|
| And, natural immunity fades faster than vaccine immunity, so
| it's _not_ unnecessary. Hybrid immunity is "provably" better
| than natural immunity alone.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| This is actually false and contradicts findings from several
| very reputable and large studies. See e.g. https://www.medrxi
| v.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v...
| bastawhiz wrote:
| > Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-
| CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained
| additional protection against the Delta variant.
|
| Did you read your own link?
| hncommenterssuk wrote:
| Cry harder f4g0t. Enjoy your experimental jab which
| doesn't stop the spread or prevent death.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| Yes - infected+vaccinated is more protected than
| infected. But infected is _way_ more protected than
| vaccinated only. If your position is that everyone should
| meet the highest standard of infected+vaccinated - which
| is only marginally better than just being infected - then
| we should be mandating mandatory covid infection. But if
| your position is that vaccination alone provides
| acceptable protection, then infection alone already far
| far surpasses that in both lasting immunity and total
| efficacy.
|
| [edit] Here is an excerpt from their conclusion:
|
| "This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers
| longer lasting and stronger protection against infection,
| symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the
| Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2
| two-dose vaccine-induced immunity."
| hncommenterssuk wrote:
| Huh? I got this done for my work. Quantitative antibody
| tests. Results came back 1 day later, cost $50.
|
| You're just another NPC who "trusts the science" which really
| means you trust cnn and fauci. Idiot.
| nojito wrote:
| Many healthcare organizations require flu shots these days.
| munk-a wrote:
| Vaccines are still beneficial and the more complicated the
| rules get the harder the administration of them becomes.
| Everyone[1] can, without any cost to themselves either
| monetarily or health-wise, go out and get a vaccine - if you
| suffered from COVID I'm sorry that you'll have long COVID
| systems but you'll also be supervaccinated at that point -
| which is even better!
|
| 1. With a few very very specific exceptions that should be
| respected.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| "because it's inconvenient" seems like a pretty poor
| precedent to set for governments mandating (unnecessary)
| medical procedures.
| munk-a wrote:
| Nah - the reason mandates are emerging is because people
| are acting irresponsibly and prolonging an event that's
| causing extreme amounts of economic damage. We want to get
| through this so that the country can return to normal
| economic activity.
|
| The reason the mandates are so sweeping is because
| Americans are intensely litigious and making them targeted
| would potentially run afoul of all sorts of laws like the
| ADA.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| From my evaluation and research, nearly all the economic
| damage is being caused by said mitigations - not the
| virus or pandemic itself. So... stop doing the things
| that damage the economy? People want to work. People want
| to travel. People want to play. Let. Them. Do. It. A few
| are fearful and want to hide - that's fine too.
| munk-a wrote:
| These mitigations wouldn't be in place if there wasn't a
| pandemic on - the faster we can solve that the faster we
| can open things up again.
|
| And this problem might be unsolvable - if that's the case
| then the vaccine mandates (which do lower risk) will
| probably become as set in stone as MMR shots which, if
| you went to school in America, you almost certainly got.
| rwcarlsen wrote:
| You mean the shots that provide sterilizing immunity for
| diseases that have orders of magnitude higher mortality
| rates for children and healthy people? None of which is
| true with COVID - and anyone that disagrees can just look
| up the stats on the CDCs website and read about
| sterilizing immunity on wikipedia.
| po1nt wrote:
| I'm all for vaccines but all against mandates. Vaccine is for
| your own safety and won't affect spread rate (that much).
| There are many procedures you can do to your body that can
| benefit you or others yet we don't act like it's legitimate
| for government to force this.
|
| You know you can live with one kidney just fine.
| lrnyc21 wrote:
| Not true. 1. By not getting vaccinated you're a potential
| Burden to the health system and taxpayers so it's a public
| health issue. 2. Data shows vaccines reduce spread.
| tomrod wrote:
| Flu vaccine is not sterilizing and commonly required required
| by employers.
| ipaddr wrote:
| These fired nurses have fallen quickly from heros to villians.
| What a terrible outcome for many who risked their lives and who
| helped so many survive. Feels like we are turning on them,
| blaming them for continued covid for not getting vaccined.
|
| The current stats don't lineup with the theory that covid is
| being spread through unvaccined healthcare workers who should be
| fully masked and protected anyways. But the vaccine debate has
| turned political and the people who were the loudest praising
| nurses are the first to throw them to the wolves.
|
| Nurses (employed still or fired) today feel forgotten.
| Celebrating them this year feels like a painful reminder of
| lockdowns.
|
| It seems like society has turned cold hearted. Perhaps the
| endless social causes brought up as an identity page has caused
| people to truly not care.
|
| How can you fire the very people who risked it all and saved you
| last year?
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| My impression is that the vaccine is a net win for almost
| everyone who takes it, and for the persons they're near*.
|
| We're losing 1400 healthcare workers in the middle of a pandemic,
| and those workers are (due to their own decisions [EDIT: s/own
| decisions/chosen stances/], I assume) losing their jobs. It just
| seems like such a tragic waste.
|
| EDIT: Just to clarify, I haven't been able to find good,
| consistent information about the extent to which being vaccinated
| makes one less prone to infect others with the delta variant. But
| transmission aside, each unvaccinated person probabilistically
| adds to their community's healthcare burden.
| kderbyma wrote:
| I am almost certain that the....'probabilitically' added
| benefit of a trained healthcare worker is likely greater than
| their taxation.....
| tomrod wrote:
| Per your edit:
| https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-
| var....
|
| > Fully vaccinated people with Delta variant breakthrough
| infections can spread the virus to others. However, vaccinated
| people appear to spread the virus for a shorter time
|
| The last sentence clarifies.
| rconti wrote:
| The last information I saw was that asymptomatic vaccinated
| individuals with the Delta variant may be just as contagious as
| the unvaccinated / symptomatic, however you are of course much
| less likely to be infected in the first place.
| tomrod wrote:
| I expect there will be a lot of comments on this post
| representing a diverse set of views.
|
| From an economics perspective, people choosing to avoid
| vaccinations adopt a stance that exacerbates a public health risk
| because, by their choice, they avoid internalizing the costs of
| their decisions. Mandates like the one rolled out by the Biden
| administration are legal, have strong standing, and are effective
| policy tools. And no one is being held down and coerced to
| receive a shot.
| AutumnCurtain wrote:
| If their hospital is anything like the one I work for, their
| business model would be crippled by not requiring vaccination
| simply due to the impact on utilization.
| po1nt wrote:
| Fair point of view. Except that everybody pays taxes yet get
| different treatment based on what they decide to do with their
| body.
| munk-a wrote:
| That has pretty much always been the case though right? In
| 1995 people who chose to smoke were prevented from being
| indoors in NYC for their entire dining experience if they
| wanted to have a cigarette. It is perfectly reasonable that
| there be some differences in treatment based on your choices.
| iammisc wrote:
| Except 'having a cigarette' and 'breathing' are activities
| with two different moral weights. 'Having a cigarette' in a
| building is a luxury. Breathing in a building is not.
|
| For example, it would be okay for a state to ban drivking
| alcohol anywhere. Alcohol is a luxury. Breathing is not.
| Neither is working.
| po1nt wrote:
| Well I'm against government forcing this either. It should
| be venues responsibility. You can always leave a venue that
| is smoker friendly.
| [deleted]
| beerandt wrote:
| It's the businesses choice to make healthcare a job benefit.
|
| I know we've gotten to where the practice it's common, but that
| doesn't make it any less of a business decision.
|
| So what happens when companies start screening new hires for
| expensive health issues?
| bastawhiz wrote:
| If the health issues were communicable to the other employees
| in the office, I would personally probably support those
| screenings. Besides being expensive for the company that pays
| me, it's entirely reasonable to expect my coworkers have done
| the absolute bare minimum to also protect me from an awful
| disease.
| beerandt wrote:
| Fauci was also for banning hiv/ aids patients from public
| places in the 80s. Because a novel disease was thought to
| be more communicable, more deadly, and more of a pandemic
| than it really was.
| bastawhiz wrote:
| > more deadly, and more of a pandemic than it really was
|
| Essentially 100% of people who contracted HIV in the 80s
| died from it. So I'm really not sure how you can say that
| it was thought to be "more deadly" or "more of a pandemic
| than it really was." HIV was a death sentence, and
| without treatment, it continues to be a death sentence.
|
| HIV and COVID-19 are not comparable, and the politics
| around them cannot be boiled down to a single person's
| opinion at any one point in time.
| akira2501 wrote:
| > they avoid internalizing the costs of their decisions.
|
| You don't know that. There are ways to take precautions to the
| benefit of your fellow citizens that do not involve taking the
| vaccine. There's more than one way to be civil.
|
| > And no one is being held down and coerced to receive a shot.
|
| No.. but you're limiting their rights under the guise that
| their decisions must be harming someone. You're engaged in
| penalizing behavior without actually establishing any guilt.
| It's disturbing that this is bandied about so readily.
| orf wrote:
| > You don't know that. There are ways to take precautions to
| the benefit of your fellow citizens that do not involve
| taking the vaccine.
|
| That's certainly true, but I expect the intersection between
| "people who don't trust vaccines" and "people who don't take
| any precautions" to be overwhelming.
| Mirioron wrote:
| Obesity has a sizable impact on the healthcare system. WHO says
| that obesity kills 2.8 million people a year.[0] Would these
| kinds of methods work there too? Get fit or be let go?
|
| Obviously this wouldn't ever be taken seriously, but it is
| surprising to me that obesity is an issue that's mostly
| ignored. Yet the impact of it is on at least the same scale as
| the pandemic.
|
| [0] https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-
| pictures/detail/6-fac...
| xjlin0 wrote:
| that's a valid argument, also please keep in mind that
| obesity kills people in decades, while covid kill people in
| days.
|
| And sadly there are some people would get fired because of
| overweight in some fields.
| dantheman wrote:
| Mandates like the one rolled out by Biden administration are
| definitely not legal, just like the eviction moratorium is not
| legal. The federal government does not have police powers and
| the agencies and regulators can't make rules outside their
| mandate.
|
| The authority to mandate vaccines is at the state and local
| level.
| chickenpotpie wrote:
| Explain OSHA
| iammisc wrote:
| Honestly... will someone please explain OSHA? It was held
| by many to be unconstitutional at the time of institution.
| It still is today. Just because the feds broke the law in
| the past doesn't mean we get to excuse it again in the
| future. The federal government is very good at breaking
| laws. At some point, they must be held to account.
| mullen wrote:
| No police powers are being used, so I don't see how that is
| relivate. Also, the Agencies are not going out of their
| mandate. OSHA was created to make the workplace safer and by
| mandating vaccines, they are.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Police powers are obviously being used... how do you think
| laws and regulations are enforced?
|
| If a business violates the OSHA rules and then doesn't pay
| the penalties, they are shut down and, if the business
| continues operating in violation of the regulators,
| arrested. That's the obvious and implicit statement. The
| police do that!
|
| The police aren't out raiding houses but the police powers
| are obviously being used; it's the state's monopoly on
| violence! It's the government's biggest lever!
| orf wrote:
| So all federal laws are invalid?
| iudqnolq wrote:
| > The federal government does not have police powers
|
| Then what's the FBI?
| da_big_ghey wrote:
| Unconstitutional. It is unconstitutional. And morally
| wrong, and very corrupt (look at literally anything Hoover
| have done, or recent scandal with spying, or Page and
| Strzok.)
| chickenpotpie wrote:
| What part of the constitution?
| iammisc wrote:
| Police power doesn't simply mean having a law enforcement
| agency. It means being able to do the daily policing work
| that the federal government is basically explicitly barred
| from doing except in particular circumstances.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_power_(United_States_c
| o...
|
| > Federal police power has been defined by Supreme Court
| rulings. In affirming that Congress has limited power to
| enact legislation, the court ruled in United States v.
| Lopez (1995) that "The Constitution...withhold[s] from
| Congress a plenary police power that would authorize
| enactment of every type of legislation."[6][7] In United
| States v. Morrison (2000), the court invalidated a
| provision of a federal law on violent crime. The court
| stated, "The regulation and punishment of intrastate
| violence that is not directed at the instrumentalities,
| channels, or goods involved in interstate commerce has
| always been the province of the States...[W]e can think of
| no better example of the police power, which the Founders
| denied the National Government and reposed in the States,
| than the suppression of violent crime..."[6][8]
| iudqnolq wrote:
| Eh, you're technically right but the courts have
| interpreted interstate commerce extremely broadly. A
| pandemic is interstate in a similar sense as the wheat in
| Wickard v. Filburn.
| iammisc wrote:
| Um okay... but he asked what the FBI was. Is the FBI
| enforcing covid vaccines? I don't think so
| iudqnolq wrote:
| I used the FBI as an example of a federal agency that has
| broad enforcement powers and that most Americans don't
| consider unconstitutional.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| A pandemic is much more legitimately interstate than
| anything in wickard v filburn
| iudqnolq wrote:
| I agree that requiring large employers to require
| vaccines has a more significant effect on interstate
| commerce that a person growing wheat for their own use. I
| think it's a similar order of magnitude though.
| tomrod wrote:
| An investigative agency.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_power_(United_States_c
| o...
| xjlin0 wrote:
| Didn't all public schools ask for student's vaccination card
| already? Legal and scientific
| chewbacha wrote:
| Fwiw; Biden has full authority to mandate federal employees
| are fully vaccinated.
| wyager wrote:
| > From an economics perspective, people choosing to avoid
| vaccinations adopt a stance that exacerbates a public health
| risk
|
| So do people choosing to leave their house. There are certain
| classes of externalities that society has chosen not to
| explicitly internalize, such as those imposed by living a
| normal life.
| codeecan wrote:
| do you know what coerced means?
|
| compelling a party to act in an involuntary manner by use of
| threats, including propaganda or force.
|
| They're clearly coerced, unless you don't think getting fired
| falls under threats.
| iammisc wrote:
| > And no one is being held down and coerced to receive a shot.
|
| This is absolutely garbage reasoning. They're having their
| livelihoods ripped away. Simply not pulling a trigger does not
| give you some moral high ground.
| darwinwhy wrote:
| Funny choice of words when talking about healthcare workers.
| munk-a wrote:
| It'll be surprising to see what actually happens when these
| mandates expire - I'm quite happy the government is taking a more
| serious approach to encouraging vaccination but I'll be
| interested to see if these folks (which I assume have loads of
| healthcare administration or service experience) will cause a
| noticeable wage dip when suddenly they're viable candidates
| again.
|
| It's also probably going to be hard getting another job right now
| if you end up disclosing that you were let go for being unwilling
| to get vaccinated. Employers probably want to avoid hiring
| unvaccinated people and also will want to avoid any HR drama
| you're going to force on them.
| zzzeek wrote:
| I would assume most of the larger companies would just keep
| them in place, as it's good for business. the mandate gave
| companies cover to do what they really wanted to do anyway.
| iammisc wrote:
| 40% of the population is unvaxxed. More will likely be unvaxxed
| when the definition of unvaxxed expands to having a booster.
| Given the racial element, you are deluded to think there will
| be a time when these people 'come back' into the workforce.
| There will either be substantial federal structural change or
| substantial economic change, if not flat out riots. There is no
| situation under which this ends well. This will go down in
| American history as a very dark dark chapter.
|
| > It's also probably going to be hard getting another job right
| now if you end up disclosing that you were let go for being
| unwilling to get vaccinated. Employers probably want to avoid
| hiring unvaccinated people and also will want to avoid any HR
| drama you're going to force on them.
|
| No it's not. Republicans are more likely to be unvaxxed and
| more likely to own small businesses. They'll be likely picking
| up solid corporate candidates, amassing wealth and power, and
| will hopefully use it to end these stupid mandates.
| munk-a wrote:
| > No it's not. Republicans are more likely to be unvaxxed and
| more likely to own small businesses. They'll be likely
| picking up solid corporate candidates, amassing wealth and
| power, and will hopefully use it to end these stupid
| mandates.
|
| This might be a bit snipey but... if you can't do the cost
| benefit analysis on getting vaccinated I think you're going
| to have problems delivering value to your company.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-04 23:02 UTC)