Boycott List: A List of Companies Forcing Vaccinations on Their Employees.

This works best if you e-mail the company and tell them you're boycotting their product(s), and why.

Lots of us have been doing this with companies that advertise on CNN for the past 4 years.

May not accomplish much, but it feels good sending those e-mails.

I doubt the accuracy of completeness on that list. AT&T is also mandating a vaccine and the information has been out since August. And they would be one of the easiest to boycott in that mobile phone users could simply switch carriers. I disagree with JAG on not being able to do anything and here's why. There's always competing companies in almost any business. Short of basic monopoly services such as the electric company and garbage and water service, most consumers have a choice with whom they spend their money. It takes effort to boycott, unity, perseverance and commitment. Boycotting should be taken seriously and must be a dedicated unified decision of a (hopefully) large amount of consumers to be effective.

AT&T* is implementing a COVID-19 vaccination policy that extends our vaccine requirement to CWA-represented employees, helping to make our workplace safer for more of our employees and customers. This follows the policy we announced in August, requiring most management employees to be vaccinated by Oct. 11, 2021.Sep 29, 2021

about.att.com...#:~:text=AT%26T*%20is%20implementing%20a%20COVID,11%2C%202021.

19 States Sue Biden Administration Over COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate.

m.theepochtimes.com... _medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-10-30-1&mktids=f388131d56fbf22abae4523d0a33f0fc&est=wA9YO6GhqN2HiC8usyEVII4M1edKtFGj7EiNd4g0yEXZDazOGHtn2FeVG K3mrvcuvCcQYTk%3D&fbclid=IwAR0LnPTElP2w1U3bDnnYGkKFvYQeNcZD2twUbxBCRkWqdNRF67Z4ar6UgYc

a reply to: IndieA

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: IndieA

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

I can imagine a lot of things.

The polio vaccine is the old vaccine technology that has proven itself for decades, unlike these modern mRNA "vaccines" that haven't even been around for a full year.

The polio vaccine worked so well they stopped giving it to people, so people telling that you don't need it these days, would be most doctors, nurses, and medical scientists, righties, lefties, and all aroundies.

a reply to: jimmyx

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

Who is pushing anyone to not get vaxxed?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: IndieA

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

If Covid-19 were serious, everyone would be lining up get vaccinated and stay boostered to the max, even with the potential negative side-effects.

If Congress and the White House staff doesn't want it, only an imbecile thinks it's good for him/her. And perhaps he/she SHOULD vax to the max.

a reply to: IndieA

It's sad these mandates are in place for a virus that is comparable with the flu. I dunno how the USPS got out of the mandates, but I'm wouldnt get it either way. I'm assuming they know nothing would be getting delivered. The turnover rate is damn near 70 on the new hire city carrier assistant side the way it is.

My coworker/friend is hard left believes and gobbles up everything CNN. He got both doses and 2 weeks after the second dose started urinating up to 15 times a day. Hes 35 mind you, but he went to the doctor and has an enlarged prostate now. Coincidence I dont think so, but who actually knows since they'll never admit it. He tries to say it cant be the vaccine. Uh put 2 and 2 together. I understand though. Once you get it it cant be taken out. So you have to put it in your head you did the right thing. No one is going to admit they poisoned their bodies. That requires admitting something is wrong with their choice.

Edit he also got his kids vaccinated as soon as it was available. I joke with him and tell him he #ed his whole family, and he just gets quite. I think deep down he wishes he would have waited.

One last thing. Kind of an update from a previous thread I made about a 96 year old on my route. Her son who is 75 and in great health. Got the vaccine in order to come visit her from kentucky. He is currently on a ventilator and they're saying he wont make it. The vaccine didn't lessen anything for him. She was crying to me the other day about it.

Add The Home Depot to the list. They are asking employees to “voluntarily” submit vax status and proof (if applicable) to comply with new “OSHA standards” and hey, theyre offering $10k raffle to all employees that do so.

Source: im a THD employee and got it sent to me via SMS

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: jimmyx

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

Who is pushing anyone to not get vaxxed?

TheRedneck

If youre under the age of around 60 or so and generally healthy, i am personally pushing for you to NOT to get vaxed.
If youre in a high risk category, id suggest getting the vax would be worth looking into.
No reason for low risk individuals to get it. Im low risk, i’d rather bet my life on roullette all in on green 00 and if it hits, i’ll get vaxed

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: IndieA

Can you imagine if this vax was for polio, and the righties were pushing you NOT to get vaxed?

Last I checked, the polio vaccine works.

Also, the polio vaccine was trialed for nearly a decade with plenty of peer review.

Also, polio was a serious disease.

I got Covid on in November 2020.

It was a mild flu. I had body aches for a few days and then it was over.

No way will I alter the natural immunity I accrued for a never ending program of shots that do not prevent getting the disease. Being part of such a program is morally reprehensible as it is more than likely to make the situation worse, in many ways it already has.

Enjoy your mandatory shots each year. I won't stop anyone from donating their life to this new form of research, but I'll fight to the death should anyone try to force this craziness on me or anyone I love. Live and let live.

If you have faith in the jabs, great! It is against the most basic laws of nature to force your faith on others and to do so is a declaration of war.

a reply to: Phatal87

My point to jimmyx was that only one side of this debate is trying to enforce their will on others, and it's not the side that questions this "vaccine."

I have seen no one yet trying to sign an Executive Order or pass any law or make any mandates that prohibit one from getting the vaccine if they so choose. If I did see anyone trying to use force of law or extreme financial pressure to coerce others into not getting it, I would be as upset as I am about the mandates. It's one thing to advise people; it is quite another to pass mandates or cause people to lose their jobs over non-compliance with a personal medical decision.

That's a tactic that is being used to support these mandates: try to spin the narrative so that it looks like it is the "anti-vaxxers" who are doing the forcing, when in actuality it is the other way around. So I called jimmyx out on it.

I notice he still has not replied. Typical.

TheRedneck

a reply to: IndieA

Just cancelled Disney Bundle F*ck em

Bad Company policies is bad for business. Will be selling ALL my shares of their stocks in 8hrs. Recommend everyone else doing it before reddit takes notice and causes a crash due to their policies. Cause a most of them are AGAINST this bs.

a reply to: Blaine91555

Could be true, however.. If you can't unload your stock in retail your stuck footing the bill. BEST thing to do is buy a bunch of crap hold it for a few weeks then return it. This way they chuck it in the junk pile.. and are out that too.. If people want to boycott and hurt the wealthy.. that is the way to handle it.. buy a bunch of # and return it just after reorders go out - which for Walmart are usually on Thursdays. Ask your local staff when they recieve their shipments.. They still get paid doing their jobs.

a reply to: IndieA

Companies FORCING..(emphasis mine)

I found this list of companies that I will be boycotting, because they don't respect the rights and privacies of their employees, or what the USA stands for.

There's a lot to unpack here.

First of all, corporations or companies don't really FORCE anything, they don't need to. They have clear contracts with the persons they hire (I am using the word 'person' very deliberately here, let those that have eyes, see). Those contracts stipulate what the person consents to and what they don't. They don't have to suddenly 'force' anything, they can just use whatever the contracts stipulate, and that's that.

To FORCE anything would clearly be unlawful, because the word implies something is done outside a contract and against someone's consent. Unless law has been broken, no one has the right to force anyone to do anything. It would be 100% unlawful, so your choice of words is very wrong here.

Also, whatever some 'corporation' 'respects' (?!) is completely irrelevant. Corporations can't 'respect' anything, they are not living human beings. Again, this is poor choice of words at best. I don't know what you really mean by 'don't respect rights or privacies' (there are no multiple 'privacies', there's only 'privacy', and no one needs to respect it any more than they are obliged to).

Look, you are obviously confused about rights, obligations, contracts, and such, so let me clarify it for you.

First, if you sign a contract that says the corporation can in the future require some kind of specific health procedure, it's all on you. It's not the 'corporation not respecting your rights', it's 'you CONSENTING to not having access to that right as long as you are employed by this corporation'.

There's a difference between a corporation's obligation to "respect rights" (they don't have this kind of obligation), and YOU actually CONSENTING to all kinds of stuff that you probably didn't read on the fine print or the EULA. It's all your own fault if you consent, it's not theirs. You don't have to work for a corporation that has a rule, code or statute stipulating that you have to cluck like a chicken every time you open a door, for example.

However, if you sign a contract where you CONSENT to doing that, then you either have to do that, or go to jail, or quit and stop being under the obligation you have consented to.

A corporation can't lawfully FORCE anyone to do anything, so I don't know what your problem is.

It's of course ridiculous that corporations have this kind of rules, but it's also ridiculous to consent to such rules and then complain about the corporation not respecting your rights.

The corporations ARE respecting your rights, you are just not seeing that the ONE right they always respect completely and perfectly (whatever 'respecting a right' means, but I am just using your terminology);

The human right for unlimited contracting.

You have the right to create unlimited contracts, even really crazy ones. That is a human right. That is a right the corporations are 100% 'respecting'. Why would you have a problem with this, and say they don't respect your human rights?

You don't have a right to FIRST consent to living under certain rules, and then not obey those rules. That is not a human right.

I hope I have cleared up things for you, there is a difference between 'human rights' and 'corporate rules you consented to obeying'.

a reply to: Shoujikina

Sematics.

How about instead of thevword force, we go with mandate and encourage with extreme prejudice?
"Do this or lose your job."
Feel better now?

If you agree that that is okay for a business to do, that's fine, I'll boycott you, because you missed the point of this post. I never claimed that companies were doing anything illegal or outside of employment contracts. I just disagree with their policies to the point that I no longer want to do business with them, or work for them, which is my right. Their policies, put in place by humans, are in direct employee's with their rights and privacies.

a reply to: Shoujikina

I'm curious... do all these companies have employment contracts that permit them to force employees to be vaccinated at company request? Seems strange if they do, because i have never seen such a clause in an employment contract in my life.

No, I think what we have here is a unilateral change in that employment contract instead of enforcement of a contract. And changing a contract unilaterally is a direct violation of contract law.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Shoujikina

I'm curious... do all these companies have employment contracts that permit them to force employees to be vaccinated at company request? Seems strange if they do, because i have never seen such a clause in an employment contract in my life.

No, I think what we have here is a unilateral change in that employment contract instead of enforcement of a contract. And changing a contract unilaterally is a direct violation of contract law.

TheRedneck

I have seen it lumped into Health and Safety within my own industry. I have even seen instances where the vaccine has been referred to safety equipment, like hard hat and steel toes.

I would agree, we appear to be expanding certain definitions within the employment contracts. That being said, I know of at least a dozen companies pumping out a revised Human Resource policy this year.

a reply to: MDDoxs

There is one vital difference between a vaccine and a hard hat or safety belt. One can take the hard hat or safety belt off when one leaves. One cannot stop being vaccinated when one leaves.

In that respect, forcing the vaccine could be seen as no different than requiring a tattoo. Would everyone OK with the vaccine mandates be OK with an employee ID number permanently burned into an employee's skin?

Employment lasts from the time one clocks in until one clocks out. Anything that lasts beyond that is not the business of the employer. They are not paying for 24/7 services.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

The way I am seeing it rationalized within my own industry is, its the price of doing business.

Clients and Vendors both have respective and mirrored policies. Clients cant have their vendors to site without proper "Health and Safety Status" and Vendors cant go to clients without the same.

Unfortunately, my industry is not a 9-5, so you never know when duty calls.