Debate flares over legal protections as businesses open up

OK you have a business and want to open . The problem is there are people and lawyers who will sue you if one of your workers gets sick from the virus (among other things). What are you going to do ? Some businesses are requesting some sort of shielding from lawsuits for opening up; and I can not blame them.

Another problem is wages.. Say you are making $20 an hour but unemployment pays $27 will you be all excited to return to work ?

ALSO...with all the misrepresentations of who died, from what, my biggest concern is people go back to work and we get another spike of reported COVID-19 cases. I would expect (not a fortune teller but) the spikes to continue until after the election, right or wrong.

This really is quite a mess, no ?

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The effort to reopen the economy in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic has set off a conflict at the state and federal level that is escalating by the day over how much legal protection companies should get if their returning workers get sick.

The White House, governors, members of congress and state lawmakers are all getting pressured by business leaders who want to be shielded from potential lawsuits brought by sick workers. They are also feeling heat on the other side from unions that want bolstered safety at workplaces and from the influential trial lawyers lobby, which hopes to preserve legal protections to go after corporations in court if people are sickened on the job.

The issue has vaulted to the forefront of the debate in Congress over the next, and fifth, coronavirus relief bill that’s still in its infancy. The safety of returning workers has dominated union negotiations between casino workers and their employers in Las Vegas. And governors in some states are imposing restrictions on the ability of people to collect unemployment if they choose not to return to work out of fear for their safety.

apnews.com...

This suspiciouly sounds like misdirection.
The gov needs to worry about being sued out of existence for picking winners and trampling civil rights.
The fake liability issues are addressed with a simple liabilty release waiver signed by an employee.

The whole article sounds like bs really.
"The businesses are worrird about being sued"
Yeah, bs...they are worried about bankruptcy.

This is what happens when the government decided to be your Mother. When the government started micro managing my health, they made the decision to be responsible for it. Now if Mother government sends me back to work, and I get sick, it is Mother government's fault. Therefore, I believe, if Mother government sends you back to work and you get sick, it's now Mother government's fault and responsibility, and Mother government should have to pay all bills related to that. Also if you die, Mother government is responsible. I didn't ask for the government to be my Mother. Maybe the government shouldn't try being my Mother? Maybe next time they let ME be responsible for my health and life. What a concept.

Iron fist conformity is being systematically woven into the tapestry of misery that is modern society. The virus is just the latest excuse. Whether it was deliberate or not, it's here and it's convenient and it works. Just another baby step towards an Orwellian wet dream.

a reply to: 727Sky
The common sense solution would be businesses would be legally vulnerable to damages only if they failed to operate the legally mandated restrictions. But are American lawyers open to common-sense solutions?

Looks like a lot of people are going to struggle go back to work for less money 😕
Personally I'm more interested in what extra measures they are going to take to protect the elderly and vulnerable, when lockdown finishes. 🤔

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: 727Sky
The common sense solution would be businesses would be legally vulnerable to damages only if they failed to operate the legally mandated restrictions. But are American lawyers open to common-sense solutions?

Then you have places like the metro I live in where the chief medical officer is in charge and decided that businesses could only open at 10% capacity and that anyone in them for more than 10 minutes had to provide personal information to the business or the business would be required to refuse service. Oh and all open businesses have to also provide PPE to employees.

All these restrictions are the Federal Government's fault because they built bombs instead of preparing for an outbreak in January, you see. He did actually say this and continues to say this every chance he gets.

It's the government's fault for not preparing the entire country with endless money for a pandemic when these things happen on average once/100 years or so.

To say nothing of wondering what the city of Kansas City has been doing to prepare itself against health emergencies. Didn't they have bio-terror plans in place that would have cross-applied to some degree? Weren't those funded? Where was the PPE for that, btw?

We could ask NYC the same thing.

But maybe we should all just accept that this was an act of nature in the main.

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
Looks like a lot of people are going to struggle go back to work for less money 😕
Personally I'm more interested in what extra measures they are going to take to protect the elderly and vulnerable, when lockdown finishes. 🤔

That money will end sooner or later.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Did you just use "Lawyers" and "Common Sense" in the same sentence?

lawyers don't make 'cents' - they do shady work for dollars.


lol

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
Looks like a lot of people are going to struggle go back to work for less money 😕
Personally I'm more interested in what extra measures they are going to take to protect the elderly and vulnerable, when lockdown finishes. 🤔

That money will end sooner or later.

Good point

Here in Michigan, the stay at home order was revised and extended another two weeks. The revisions allow some businesses to reopen and for some non-essential workers to go back to work. Our governess wants to extend the state of emergency another 28 days and will likely do so. We will find out in the next day or so.

My job seems to fit in the category of necessary for minimum operations, however, I'm bringing in double of what I was making through unemployment and the Trump stimulus. As a janitor for a public school that is shut down until September, I imagine they will have me back long enough to do the summer break cleaning and lay me off again in a month or so. Seeing how the school was cleaned daily until March with some extra disinfecting and deep cleaning, I'm not worried about contracting the virus. Along with only a few of us in the building and doing a reduced shift, I'll be working alone in a building that was vacant for over a month now.

What does worry me is that they will want me to sign a waiver that if I get sick at work, they won't be responsible. I'll know Monday when I go back in. If that happens I'll refuse to sign it and likely get fired, if not I'll take the pay cut for a month then get unemployment again for a couple more months.