TriHealth fires 150 employees for not getting flu shots

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Tecumte

Originally posted by InTheLight
Back to the topic of having the freedom to reject a flu shot, I say it should not be mandatory.

Absolutely, the War on Liberty and on personal choice is by far a greater threat to the human condition than catching the flu. The collectivists will never rest from trying to force their ideas and methods for what the perceive as the 'common good' onto others, no matter how misguided, we see that smokescreen used not just in health but more in every area of society. I am happy to see so many people, more every day, fighting back against these fascist types

So, the restaurant owner who does strictly require that employees wash their hands after going to the bathroom is a vile Fascist?

I don't like washing hands. I want my liberty back! I don't care if you get some of my poop in your sandwich. I'm a free person, dammit! I'm also very smart!

Lol, no that's what we would call a sort of straw man and really irrelevant.. Now back to the topic. I have personally witnesssed someone close paralyzed for nearly 2 months and who nearly died from their reaction to a flu shot, they were lucky they *finally* seem to have recovered. If I have, how many others too? Of the gullible sheep at my work place that took this years 'lucky rabbits foot' flu shots, many became sick and missed days of work within days of being injected. I think a better analogy you could have used would have been "I love making billions off of sickened sheep" and...."I don't care if you become paralyzed or die, too many people anyway, buy my snake oil dammit, I'm a free billionaire, who's gonna make my lear jet payments?'

Originally posted by Tecumte
I have personally witnesssed someone close paralyzed for nearly 2 months and who nearly died from their reaction to a flu shot, they were lucky they *finally* seem to have recovered.

There are people who get paralyzed and nearly due every year, from eating beef patties. Feel free to firebomb fast food places, I guess.

There is always a risk that someone will suffer from a medicine. Medicine being XYZ. If you don't like it, don't work there. As I said, I consented to peeing in a cup when I was hired. I could equally refuse it. My choice.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Tecumte
I have personally witnesssed someone close paralyzed for nearly 2 months and who nearly died from their reaction to a flu shot, they were lucky they *finally* seem to have recovered.

There are people who get paralyzed and nearly due every year, from eating beef patties. Feel free to firebomb fast food places, I guess.

There is always a risk that someone will suffer from a medicine. Medicine being XYZ. If you don't like it, don't work there. As I said, I consented to peeing in a cup when I was hired. I could equally refuse it. My choice.

Sure it's your choice for now, take it if you want, I think it's needless and foolish but knock yourself out. There are much much better and much less risky ways to maintain health than injecting toxins. The problem comes about when someone like you or anyone else tries to force their beliefs (and poisons) on others just to make a quick buck. I'm glad to see the alt media has picked this story up and people are not going to roll over so easy.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by Pilot

 

Sorry dude, but that's mostly a red herring that you posted. Thankfully, but it's not the "Government" who is "forcing" us to be "stabbed" at this point, at least not yet and I don't see it happening in foreseeable future. Look, an employer elected to have a policy about vaccination. It's not really an edict of the President or some law passed by the Congress. Chill. I had to pee in a cup for drug testing when I was applying to a job once. I passed.

in this story but not all of them.
did you miss the entire State of FL ??
the entire medical industry is under a state-wide mandate to receive said vax ... that IS the government mandating ... the medical employees had no vote, no say and no job if they decline.

it's not a matter of IF but WHEN it's coming to your state.
oh, and a county in this state (Sarasota) has the same mandate for ALL state employees regardless the type of employment ... from clerical workers to librarians to parks & recreation ... all of them.

CNN pimping for the drug pushers (and eugenicists)

foodfreedomgroup.com...

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


Never heard of this during EMT work (A lot of them ARE smokers.)

But I do understand the policy. Smoking can pretty severely weaken your ability to prevent and fight a respiratory infection.

Originally posted by Tecumte

Originally posted by InTheLight
Back to the topic of having the freedom to reject a flu shot, I say it should not be mandatory.

Absolutely, the War on Liberty and on personal choice is by far a greater threat to the human condition than catching the flu. The collectivists will never rest from trying to force their ideas and methods for what the perceive as the 'common good' onto others, no matter how misguided, we see that smokescreen used not just in health but more in every area of society. I am happy to see so many people, more every day, fighting back against these fascist types who somehow feel they need to force or coherce everyone else into what they choose, that they alone know what choices others should make and how others should live their lives. I can easily see how if any form of 'obamacare' ever was forced on Americans, even the ability to choose control over one's own body would rapidly be lost by decree.

It's called 'self-entitlement' and I see it in my children's eyes. We must perservere.

Originally posted by Tecumte
The problem comes about when someone like you or anyone else tries to force their beliefs (and poisons) on others just to make a quick buck.

If you can't stand the smell of timber, don't be a carpenter. If you don't want to work for the employer who insists that vaccination is vital to their mission, then don't. You are a free person. Hell, you can always go to Malawi.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Tecumte
The problem comes about when someone like you or anyone else tries to force their beliefs (and poisons) on others just to make a quick buck.

If you can't stand the smell of timber, don't be a carpenter. If you don't want to work for the employer who insists that vaccination is vital to their mission, then don't. You are a free person. Hell, you can always go to Malawi.

since when is the smell of timber equal to poison ?
it may be noxious to some but i would presume that alone would preclude them from carpentry.

so, why don't you agree with the individual freedom to decline without consequence ?

Originally posted by Pilot
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Because you don't see it in the foreseeable future?? Ok. I guess you didn't read the link. Never mind.

Now the fight against government-mandated vaccines is coming to a head in California, where a newly-introduced bill, AB 2109, would force parents to go to their doctor to get a personal belief exemption to prevent their children from being vaccinated.

I'm trying to return to the topic of the thread, dude.

Fair enough. You do have a point, however, there is a radical difference between a private entity having a vaccination of their workforce with the intent of protecting the people they serve--the immunocompromised patient--as a part of the employment requirements and the government mandating vaccinations. With an employer, the employee can walk away if he so chooses. With the government, not so much.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Pilot
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Because you don't see it in the foreseeable future?? Ok. I guess you didn't read the link. Never mind.

Now the fight against government-mandated vaccines is coming to a head in California, where a newly-introduced bill, AB 2109, would force parents to go to their doctor to get a personal belief exemption to prevent their children from being vaccinated.

I'm trying to return to the topic of the thread, dude.

Fair enough. You do have a point, however, there is a radical difference between a private entity having a vaccination of their workforce with the intent of protecting the people they serve--the immunocompromised patient--as a part of the employment requirements and the government mandating vaccinations. With an employer, the employee can walk away if he so chooses. With the government, not so much.

The question I would ask thoough, is that if an employer asks me to do something that in my opinion carries extreme risk to my safety and I decline, how far do they have the right to go to try and coherce me to the point of termination? I'm all for private employers rights as I am also for individual rights, but I work in a laboratory setting and I work with things (carcinogens) like formaldehyde etc. if my boss told me he thought I needed to load up a syringe and inject myself with formaldehyde in order to get healthier because his boss told him it was the latest health craze, and being pimped by Big Pharma interests, how far would he be able to go to try and force me to do that? If this hasn't made it's way through the courts it needs to. Employers rights only extend so far.

You see I don't feel I need any extra formaldehye injected to be healthy, or mercury for that matter, no thanks I'll pass, these things are KNOWN to be toxic, read the MSDS on Thimerosal, I don't want aluminum injected into my body either, these things have a potential to end up in the human brain and other organs and may bind there,they have a potential to degrade my immune system and cause damage over time, in fact this might make my job performance worse, it may well make me MORE unsafe in my job.

reply to post by Tecumte


However, you make the assumption that it is part of big pharma conspiracy or the latest ehalth craze and not a sincere attempt to protect the at rick population that is the cutomer of the hospital.

I'm for freedom of choice: if neither you nor your employer can come to a mutually agreeable resolution to any situation, then either side should be free to stop the relationship.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
reply to post by Tecumte

 

However, you make the assumption that it is part of big pharma conspiracy or the latest ehalth craze and not a sincere attempt to protect the at rick population that is the cutomer of the hospital.

I'm for freedom of choice: if neither you nor your employer can come to a mutually agreeable resolution to any situation, then either side should be free to stop the relationship.

As to the first part of your assertion I would not say it is some big 'conspiracy' perse, though it should be evident most every successful company works in virutally every way possible to increase their bottom line by getting their products out through as many channels as possible. It is really just a business model.

Secondly whether one likes it or not their are all sorts of OSHA type laws and those that protect against discrimination and unsafe work environments already in place. I consider not just my external environment needs to be healthy and safe but my internal environment as well, and this includes not being forced or coherced into injecting known toxins.

So I'm glad to see these employees will be getting their jobs back, and their employer won't bend to the will of Big Pharma to try and continue to open up unwilling markets. Right???

I'm surpirsed to see this thread was dropped. This issue will continue to be advanced over time by the interests who will profit from this. This is a big issue IMO, the right of the integrity of one's own body not to be forced to inject known toxins in order to not be discrminated against.

reply to post by Quauhtli


The insurance companies seem to be joining the 'misinformed' bandwagon very easily. They don't seem to be spending their money on fact finding. Perhaps they don't care and it's all a sham.

Originally posted by InTheLight
reply to post by Quauhtli

 

The insurance companies seem to be joining the 'misinformed' bandwagon very easily. They don't seem to be spending their money on fact finding. Perhaps they don't care and it's all a sham.

I would suggest exploring the idea of 'interlocking directorates'. It's quite eye opening to see what kind of economic decisons are reached when you have board of directors setting in decision making circles deciding what gets done or not in 'competing' lol interests. It's kind of like Wal-mart to my way of thinking, getting someone in the door with that 69.00 wide screen TV, only to sell them a couple hundred dollars extra of useless made in the Orient junk. You get the idea.

reply to post by Tecumte

haven't seen this update in the news, gotta link ??

So I'm glad to see these employees will be getting their jobs back, and their employer won't bend to the will of Big Pharma to try and continue to open up unwilling markets

if this is true, i'm glad to hear it.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Tecumte

 

haven't seen this update in the news, gotta link ??

So I'm glad to see these employees will be getting their jobs back, and their employer won't bend to the will of Big Pharma to try and continue to open up unwilling markets

if this is true, i'm glad to hear it.

Ooops, should have used the little eye rolling icon, (thought my sarcasm came through) no unfortunately I haven't heard it either. In fact I see where the groveling media is pushin the$e things with no mercy as well and where the needle pushers are trying to force their way into local and state legislation and into communities through their mouthpieces.

Ok, line up sheep, pretty sooon that exemption is goining to be useless, you will comply, a little mercury, aluminum, surfactants, formaldehyde, injected yearly over a lifetime never hurt anyone, and it helps to keep us all employed, so now line up and shut up or your're going to be out in the unemployment line.

BY WILLIAM WEIR, [email protected]

6:55 p.m. EST, December 5, 2012
Despite resistance from some employees, more state hospitals this year are making flu shots mandatory for all workers, and some have even suspended or dismissed a handful who have not complied.

This year, 19 of the 29 acute care hospitals in the state require that all employees get flu vaccinations. It's a sharp increase from last year, when there were only five. State health officials did not name the hospitals.

There has been dissent from some employees.


Topics
Diseases and Illnesses
Shootings
Hospitals and Clinics
See more topics »
XPreventative Medicine
Vaccines
Disease Prevention
Chemical Industry
Pharmaceuticals
Flu
Flu Vaccine
Waterbury
Hartford Hospital
Immune System
Connecticut Children's Medical Center
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Pneumonia
Allergies
H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine At Waterbury Hospital, dozens of employees initially refused to get a flu shot, but after being threatened with unpaid suspension and possible dismissal, only two full-time employees had failed to get a vaccination or exemption by Wednesday. They have been suspended

www.courant.com...

reply to post by Tecumte

;( ahhh, i so missed the/your sarcasm, sorry

then again, maybe i just needed a spark of good news and thought i had found it ... yeah, so much for that idea.

as for the rest of this post, it's happening in the next county over and to every county employee, no matter the job title/skill.

sad, sad and just plain bad all the way around.