No EI for the unvaccinated

[fluffy]

If one person dies from the vaccine being essentially forced on them to continue employment then that means whoever agrees with the mandate is ok with human sacrifice to save others.

Human sacrifice is never the correct answer.

You're arguing against yourself here. By refusing the vaccine you are indeed saying that your rights trump the health and safety of others. It's a matter of degrees, while the odds of dying from a Covid infection are low in relation to total cases, the odds of dying from the vaccine are minuscule in comparison. The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

[rustled]

As far as I'm concerned, refusing the vaccination on the grounds of the "my rights" argument is selfish and irresponsible, and paying out EI in those cases is just subsidizing stupid.

If one person dies from the vaccine being essentially forced on them to continue employment then that means whoever agrees with the mandate is ok with human sacrifice to save others.

Human sacrifice is never the correct answer.

Yup. We're obviously not as evolved as the progressives would like to believe. Still ok with sacrificing some "for the good of the many", and all... I wonder what the odds were of a banished "witch" surviving in the puritan North American wilderness? This mob mentality borne of fear and ignorance has persisted throughout history.

[skydawg]

It would be impossible for employers to constantly test employees for their infectious status. Think of employers with hundreds or thousands of employees. Think of the costs. Think of how quickly labs would be overrun.

So we choose the logical and best option. Keep the vaccinated employees who are very unlikely to carry and transmit the virus.

And fire those who act as incubators/spreaders because they are too lazy/stupid to get vaccinated

Sure but the vaccinated people still get, carry and spread the virus. Their symptoms may be less severe but still spreading it.

[crookedmember]

If one person dies from the vaccine being essentially forced on them to continue employment then that means whoever agrees with the mandate is ok with human sacrifice to save others.

Human sacrifice is never the correct answer.

But it's OK for the unvaccinated to spread a virus that is statistically much more likely to kill other people, than the vaccine is to kill them?

There have been 30,000 COVID deaths in Canada. Just exactly how many has the vaccine killed?

Talk about grasping at straws.

[the truth]

It would be impossible for employers to constantly test employees for their infectious status. Think of employers with hundreds or thousands of employees. Think of the costs. Think of how quickly labs would be overrun.

So we choose the logical and best option. Keep the vaccinated employees who are very unlikely to carry and transmit the virus.

And fire those who act as incubators/spreaders because they are too lazy/stupid to get vaccinated

Sure but the vaccinated people still get, carry and spread the virus. Their symptoms may be less severe but still spreading it.

exactly, the whole thing is a joke

[crookedmember]

"But the vaccinated get the virus too!!!" (ad infinitum)


Anyone can get in a car accident that kills people.

But drunk drivers are far more likely to.

The unvaxxed are a lot like drunk drivers.

[rustled]

It would be impossible for employers to constantly test employees for their infectious status. Think of employers with hundreds or thousands of employees. Think of the costs. Think of how quickly labs would be overrun.

So we choose the logical and best option. Keep the vaccinated employees who are very unlikely to carry and transmit the virus.

And fire those who act as incubators/spreaders because they are too lazy/stupid to get vaccinated

Sure but the vaccinated people still get, carry and spread the virus. Their symptoms may be less severe but still spreading it.

Yup. And because their symptoms are less severe, I think we'll find they are more likely to spend more time in the workplace infecting others.

[erinmore3775]

Being required to be vaccinated in order to work in certain professions or workplaces is not the equivalent of banishing witches. There is a choice here. You can get vaccinated and work for a company that requires the vaccination or you may choose to work elsewhere. The employer has the choice of implementing the vaccine health and safety mandate. The employee has a choice of whether to follow that requirement/mandate.

If the employee breaks the employment contract they may be dismissed for cause and probably will not be eligible for EI. The employer who institutes such a vaccine mandate must also take into consideration how that mandate will affect their production, services provided, and customer relations. Currently almost 90% of the BC population see vaccinations as a positive defence against COVID and its variants. Therefore, an employer mandate requiring vaccination would probably make good business sense in spite of the fact that maybe up-to 10% of their workforce may choose to leave.

Those that choose not to get vaccinated are not being banished to the wastelands to die. They are being allowed to live their lives according to their choices. As a result, their social and travel activities may be limited. Their opportunity for employment may also be limited. However, their right to make choices has not been curtailed.

This is not a debate on whether vaccines are good or bad. This is simply a debate on whether people have a right to make a personal choice and whether that choice supersedes the rights of others. EI was established to help those who lost employment due to circumstances or working conditions beyond their control, not out of a circumstance resulting from personal choice. Choosing not to get vaccinated is a personal choice.

[rustled]

Being required to be vaccinated in order to work in certain professions or workplaces is not the equivalent of banishing witches. There is a choice here. You can get vaccinated and work for a company that requires the vaccination or you may choose to work elsewhere. The employer has the choice of implementing the vaccine health and safety mandate. The employee has a choice of whether to follow that requirement/mandate.

Not equivalent, but similar. They're being banished from the workplace, to provide a false sense of security to those supporting their banishment.

Their "choice" to avoid banishment from the workplace is to accept a vaccination they prefer not to accept, primarily to assuage those who still believe that if more of us are vaccinated we will achieve the same sort of herd immunity we've achieved with smallpox, when in fact the coronavirus has more in common with the seasonal flu.

If this was about workplace safety, tests would be mandated to prevent infected workers from spending time in the workplace.

If the employee breaks the employment contract they may be dismissed for cause and probably will not be eligible for EI. The employer who institutes such a vaccine mandate must also take into consideration how that mandate will affect their production, services provided, and customer relations. Currently almost 90% of the BC population see vaccinations as a positive defence against COVID and its variants. Therefore, an employer mandate requiring vaccination would probably make good business sense in spite of the fact that maybe up-to 10% of their workforce may choose to leave.

Those that choose not to get vaccinated are not being banished to the wastelands to die. They are being allowed to live their lives according to their choices. As a result, their social and travel activities may be limited. Their opportunity for employment may also be limited. However, their right to make choices has not been curtailed.

LOL. Those who can't afford what you support are NOT being allowed to live their lives according to their choices - they are being forced to comply with a belief-based workplace rule: the belief that only the unvaccinated are likely to bring covid into the workplace and infect others.

If this was about workplace safety, tests would be mandated to prevent infected workers from spending time in the workplace.

This is not a debate on whether vaccines are good or bad. This is simply a debate on whether people have a right to make a personal choice and whether that choice supersedes the rights of others.

The choice not to be vaccinated doesn't change whether or not an employee brings covid into the workplace and infects others.

If this was about workplace safety, tests would be mandated to prevent infected workers from spending time in the workplace.

EI was established to help those who lost employment due to circumstances or working conditions beyond their control, not out of a circumstance resulting from personal choice. Choosing not to get vaccinated is a personal choice.

We don't allow employers to fire people for personal choices that are not proven to affect their fellow workers - yet. Vaccinated people can and do infect other people with covid. We don't yet know, and may never know, if there's a significant difference in the risk - and we do know that vaccinated people are more likely to have milder symptoms and less likely to be aware they have covid. The vaccinated may well prove to be as likely to become our generation's "Typhoid Marys" as the unvaccinated.

If this was about workplace safety, tests would be mandated to prevent infected workers from spending time in the workplace.

[fluffy]

There have been 30,000 COVID deaths in Canada. Just exactly how many has the vaccine killed?

How dare you bring facts and common sense into this discussion.

[the truth]

There have been 30,000 COVID deaths in Canada. Just exactly how many has the vaccine killed?

How dare you bring facts and common sense into this discussion.

well and govt and big pharma will never tell us, why you ask this is why
all they do is lie , only a fool would trust these people https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.c ... -lawsuits/

[crookedmember]

If one person dies from the vaccine being essentially forced on them to continue employment then that means whoever agrees with the mandate is ok with human sacrifice to save others.

Human sacrifice is never the correct answer.

I'm certainly glad you folks were not around on D-Day, because we'd all be speaking German.

Although I wouldn't exactly compare taking a safe and effective vaccine to storming the beaches.

[crookedmember]

Yup. And because their symptoms are less severe, I think we'll find they are more likely to spend more time in the workplace infecting others.

I certainly hope you didn't make the same baseless bet on polio.

[Sparki55]

The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

There will be one person who will die if the vaccine that would not have died from Covid. With over 7 billion doses administered it has happened.

If that person took the vaccine due to pressure from employment then it has been human intervention that chose who lived and died. Dying from Covid is random chance combined with pre existing conditions.

It's unethical. You never kill one person to save another no matter how many it saves.

Personal sacrifice is different and noble. I got the vaccine to save others but not because I was forced by someone else.

[Sparki55]

There have been 30,000 COVID deaths in Canada. Just exactly how many has the vaccine killed?

Talk about grasping at straws.

If the vaccine has killed just one person it's an unethical choice for somebody else to make.

You don't kill anyone just to save another person. Not one person is more or less valuable than anyone else.