Intel Tells Unvaccinated Employees They Face Unpaid Leave (apnews.com) 227
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Associated Press: Intel has told workers that unvaccinated people who don't get an exemption for religious or medical reasons will be on unpaid leave beginning in April. The California-based semiconductor company told employees last month they had a Jan. 4 deadline to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or seek an exemption, citing a government mandate for federal contractors.
In a Dec. 7 memo to employees, Chief People Officer Christy Pambianchi told employees the Jan. 4 vaccine deadline remains in place. She wrote that employees who aren't vaccinated must seek a medical or religious accommodation and submit to weekly testing, regardless of whether they are still working remotely. Intel will review employees' exemption requests until March 15. Pambianchi said employees who don't receive an exemption will begin unpaid leave on April 4 for at least three months but "will not be terminated." She said Intel will continue providing health care benefits to unvaccinated employees on leave.
In a Dec. 7 memo to employees, Chief People Officer Christy Pambianchi told employees the Jan. 4 vaccine deadline remains in place. She wrote that employees who aren't vaccinated must seek a medical or religious accommodation and submit to weekly testing, regardless of whether they are still working remotely. Intel will review employees' exemption requests until March 15. Pambianchi said employees who don't receive an exemption will begin unpaid leave on April 4 for at least three months but "will not be terminated." She said Intel will continue providing health care benefits to unvaccinated employees on leave.
At will employment (Score:4, Informative)
Well you wanted at will employment so companies can fire anyone for any reason. So enjoy!
Re:At will employment (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
So that's the issue. If they already have Intel Inside, why are they worried about Bill Gates Inside?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:At will employment (Score:5, Insightful)
They are on the side of the employees that don't want to get COVID from un-vaccinated cow-orkers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody can guarantee 100% non-transmission, but at least with vaccination the chances are reduced. No vaccine - no gain for union or workers, perhaps some mild satisfaction for the tiny minority of uneducated/misguided anti-vaxxers. With vaccine, fewer people get sick, fewer people in union die, for a jab that takes all of 30 seconds to get it's a big benefit.
Re: (Score:3)
The unions are on the employees' side, but that's not why they are in favor of vaccination. Only idiots would want their constituents to die.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, go figure. The unions care about their members heatlh.
Insurance (Score:2)
I expect that this is 100% about insurance costs. And that Intel is not the first and will not be the last company who will institute this kind of policy as a requirement to keep their insurance premiums from sky rocketing and affecting the bottom line/shareholder value.
Religious reasons? (Score:5, Insightful)
I really don't understand why anyone should be exempt for something as superfluous as "religion". Doesn't this effectively mean everyone who wants to be exempt can claim exemption?
Why can't it just be left at "medical reasons" only, and remove the magic man in the sky (or whatever ones mythology is) entirely?
Re:Religious reasons? (Score:4, Insightful)
So I guess Intel just wants the anti-vaxxers to claim that a god or some angel or holy Mary spoke to them, delivering the message that just like in the book of Job they need to proof their faith by suffering (from Covid-19).
Re: (Score:2)
In most workplaces, people requesting religious exemptions have to explain the request. They have to be a member of a religion that actually forbids vaccination. Most religious exemption applications are denied, because the person turns out to be a Southern Baptist or something.
Re: (Score:3)
I really don't understand why anyone should be exempt for something as superfluous as "religion". Doesn't this effectively mean everyone who wants to be exempt can claim exemption?
Why can't it just be left at "medical reasons" only, and remove the magic man in the sky (or whatever ones mythology is) entirely?
The reason is that we live in a multicultural society premised in universal liberalism and the existence of intrinsic human dignity and rights.
For those who hold their faith sincerely, it is an immutable characteristic of their person. And it's a pointless cruelty to punish them for it. If your objective, is, e.g., to raise a bigger army, threatening to imprison Quakers who won't fight will not help meet that objective, it will just result in having to imprison a bunch of Quakers.
If your idea is to just kee
Re: (Score:2)
The medical reasons option seems to be widely abused. I was looking for some ear-savers on eBay the other day, typed in "mask" and the suggestion box offered half a dozen variations on "mask exemption lanyard".
Problem is you can't ask people to give their medical history to justify their exemption, you can only take their word for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
> "because freedom of conscience being strictly protected in the constitution" Please provide more detail on how your at will employment protected by the constitution?
Corporations are legal charters granted by the government and thus must comply with its restrictions.
I agree, a non-corporate company should be able to do whatever the hell it wants re: employment.
Re: (Score:2)
that's pure bullshit.
its about pandering to the mentally limited. you know, the religious.
they are not able to think higher than a certain level and if you want to keep the natives from attacking (yes, they are not much more than animals when they act like this) you have to treat them as dangerous animals who can do harmful things on an emotional flare-up.
these are not rational beings, here. these people think that BELIEF in a sky daddy is good enough to stop actual viruses from spreading.
I hate that we
Re: (Score:2)
Your understanding of viruses and gender are roughly equal and close to zero.
Screw the Religious Exemptions Too (Score:4, Insightful)
Every major religion has come out in support of the vaccines. There is nothing in it that would be objectionable to anyone who takes any medication or over the counter pain med (Tylenol, aspirin, etc.).
Even the US Army has given out zero religious exemptions
Re: (Score:2)
Every major religion has come out in support of the vaccines.
Like in https://www.npr.org/sections/g... [npr.org] or https://www.ucanews.com/news/k... [ucanews.com] ?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sorry, I didn't know that Intel had a plant in Kenya.
But since you are using Catholicism, Pope beats Bishop: https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The pope came out in support of the vaccines. The bishops who are defying that have no authority to do so and do not speak for the church.
Try again.
Re: (Score:2)
Every major religion has come out in support of the vaccines. There is nothing in it that would be objectionable to anyone who takes any medication or over the counter pain med (Tylenol, aspirin, etc.).
You know what gets me they didn't have to do it but they went there and did it anyway with predictable results in the mostly religious crowd that could have been avoided.
Saying there is nothing in it to some is analogous to saying we murdered this person in cold blood and stole their cellular phone. There is nothing objectionable in the cellular phone of this murdered person or the information extracted from it.
Tylenol came out in the 1950s and aspirin in the 1890s predating fetal lines from abortion.
Of co
Re: (Score:2)
Saying there is nothing in it to some is analogous to saying we murdered this person in cold blood and stole their cellular phone. There is nothing objectionable in the cellular phone of this murdered person or the information extracted from it.
Tylenol came out in the 1950s and aspirin in the 1890s predating fetal lines from abortion.
Of course most people will just find religion for their exemption anyway but this was an avoidable problem for the people who actually care and might otherwise elect to get vaccinated.
I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about but there are no fetal cells in the vaccines. Yes cells from the fetal lines have been used in testing, but that goes for the same thing for pretty much every other medication, Viagra, high blood pressure, flu vaccines, cold medications, etc.. Aspirin and Tylenol have since been tested on the fetal cells.
So unless they also forgo all other medications they don't have a leg to stand on. It is obvious that they are just using it as an excuse, and I'm glad more
Re: (Score:2)
The problem for companies is they have to face the risk of denying someone's claim of religious belief, which some companies are reluctant to do.
We are faced with an area church, for example, writing that it is their congregations belief that the vaccine is the mark of the beast. Being a protestant Christian church, there's no higher authority to say "your leader says that's not the case". So it's not simply a matter of finding that the medicine itself does not run afoul, they still have material they can t
Re: (Score:2)
True. Luckily more and more are challenging them or requiring significant documentation to support such claims.
But even so, who cares. Just because they find a priest from Q-Church to fill out a form, doesn't mean a business has to allow it. I think it is time to no longer consider these wacky religious exemptions as "reasonable accommodations". "I appreciate that your Church of The Naked Man doesn't allow you to wear clothes and cover God's Devine work, but need to wear clothes in the office. If not f
Re: (Score:2)
Pastafarians can get a letter exempting them from working with or around unvaccinated people. Would be interesting to see how that works, two people with religious exemptions in conflict with one another.
Re: (Score:2)
By "major" I didn't mean to say "all" or something. I was using that as a sample. I'm sure there are many smaller religions that are opposed to it. In addition Christianity doesn't have a top person that can say X is good or bad.
But who cares, there is no good religious argument to be made against the vaccine for people in modern society. Virtually all medications both over the counter and prescription have been tainted fetal cell line testing. That also applies to many foods and cosmetics. So unless
Fox tabloid is in on the game (Score:3)
The Fox tabloid has told all its employees they must show proof [yahoo.com] of receiving at least one covid vaccination by Monday, December 27th. There are no longer any exceptions to be tested.
It will be interesting to see if the talking heads will stand up and walk away for being "forced" into being sheeple.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Trump admitted he's had two shots and the booster, which has led to epic levels of cognitive dissonance among his worshipers, err, I mean "followers".
Re: (Score:3)
It will be interesting to see if the talking heads will stand up and walk away for being "forced" into being sheeple.
They were all vaccinated at the first chance they had. Their on air personas are all an act. They don't believe any of the stuff they say. Every time they get sued over something they say on the air, their defense in court is "The show is entertainment. No reasonable person would believe what they say is true." And that defense works.
Not a problem ; get religion (Score:5, Informative)
Allowing "religious" exemptions from vaccination is simply allowing someone to avoid vaccination as a matter of personal opinion, if they use the right form of words.
Religion is a personal opinion, nothing more. It has no place in public health policies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
This is "Congress" not "Intel" so it has no bearing on Intel's own policies. However, even if the US Government were to make rules about this, allowing people to ignore public health regulations simply because they claim "religion" is respecting that "establishment of religion", in particular compared to an atheist who has no "religion" to claim.
I'm not sure where you can get some religious exemptio
"Religious" exemption? (Score:2, Insightful)
Aw, come on. It's time to push back against this "religious exemption" bullshit. Various and sundry beliefs in a mythical sky-creature should not be a get-out-of-jail-free card for anything someone disagrees with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aw, come on. It's time to push back against this "religious exemption" bullshit. Various and sundry beliefs in a mythical sky-creature should not be a get-out-of-jail-free card for anything someone disagrees with.
Well said. It's ridiculous that anyone still believes in this horseshit.
They're welcome to wallow in their kooky beliefs but they're NOT welcome to fuck up my life, safety, or health in the process.
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccine *usually* works to prevent serious illness and death and also works to reduce how contagious you are once infected.
There are unlucky few for whom the vaccine isn't going to work, and those folks get to suffer by having the illness sustained by the unvaccinated until it has a turn. Just like how anti-vaxx caused communities to contend with mumps even among some vaccinated despite that being pretty much unheard of prior to big anti-vaxx push.
Some immuno-compromised people are going to be at especi
About time (Score:2)
"Intel Tells Unvaccinated Employees They Face Unpaid Leave"
Good. They shouldn't have waited this long but better late than never.
I work for a healthcare company. EVERYONE is required to show proof of vaccination, and the ones who want to stand on their principles and say no are welcome to GTFO.
Maybe weekly testing is better than doing nothing (Score:2)
It's all about biasing the odds, but weekly testing seems inadequate especially for omicron. We have only preliminary estimates but it might be as short as three days. That's quite a window for an infected employee to pass it on to several other employees, who would then have a great chance to be contagious before their next test.
That's what a pair of professors of medicine thought even before omicron:
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com] (paywalled). They like testing, but not as an alternative to vaccination
Flying Spaghetti Monster provides exemptions (Score:2, Offtopic)
The FSM church provides the needed exemption letters to anyone :
https://app.spaghettimonster.o... [spaghettimonster.org]
The two sides of COVID (Score:2)
Mandate is on hold due to lawsuits (Score:2)
Don't fear covid (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I've never been afraid for myself personally. I've been afraid for the at-risk people among my friends, family and community. Getting vaccinated and social distancing has always been primarily about protecting the vulnerable, so whether I am personally afraid for my own safety has fuck all to do with it.
That said, I know several young, healthy, low-risk people that have gotten long COVID. A scientist and a lead software developer who are both severely (and possibly permanently) limited in the degree and dur
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if that were true, you have to get COVID to get "natural immunity". Nobody is "naturally immune" to it the first time. The people who fed you idiots "natural immunity" as the current talking point are trying to kill you.
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:4, Interesting)
Even if that were true, you have to get COVID to get "natural immunity". Nobody is "naturally immune" to it the first time. The people who fed you idiots "natural immunity" as the current talking point are trying to kill you.
Getting COVID is mostly preventable now, so play stupid games win stupid prizes. I've decided at this point it is probably better to just let Darwinian evolution take its course.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't seem to know what immunity means. 3 months after an infection, the body loses all awareness of the virus and you become just as vulnerable as before.
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/researc... [jhsph.edu]
Natural Immunity was 13 times better than double vax mrna. Pfizer are spending bucket loads on mis-information to keep their gravy train rolling along.
If you die from Covid-19, you have have 100 percent immunity from any more Covid 19 infections. Look it up.
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:4, Insightful)
> If you die from Covid-19, you have have 100 percent immunity from any more Covid 19 infections. . Look it up.
Very science-loving of you to duck a legitimate point like that. Ooh, and look, the pro-science folks approve! Saweeet! That sure does tickle the ole dopamine receptors, eh? This conformity stuff is alright!
In the end though - it does reduce to something so simple. This is the utter weirdness of the Covid anti-vaxxers. Most so busy coming up with all kinds of half witted reasons for not taking a vaccine like microchip implants, searching for and promoting kooky alternate reality treatments like Ivermectin and Betadine gargle - what happened to the malaria medicine?
Cryste on a pogo stick - a nice sodium hypochlorite solution will stop Covid 19 in it's tracks as well. Perhaps someone can try Arsenic salts and mercury urethral lavage as well. Makes about as much sense.
As I've noted before vaccines are much like seat belts in cars. Maybe you'll never get in an accident in your life. Maybe you'll just get in some minor fender benders. Or maybe you'll get in a real doozy that the seat belt saves you. You very well might survive to old age without ever needing any vaccines or set belts of any type at all, then in a moment of solipsism and survivors bias, you can claim that no one ever needed them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Natural Immunity was 13 times better than double vax mrna.
Pfizer are spending bucket loads on mis-information to keep their gravy train rolling along.
Bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
It also shows that an unvaccinated person with prior infection is twice as likely to experience a breakthrough infection than a vaccinated person with prior infection.
Don't worry, I'm sure that the first part is highly accurate but the last part is just BS - don't let your little pretend world come crashing down
Re: (Score:2)
A single study, "not yet peer reviewed", that contradicts peer-reviewed work done in every country to date. Wonder who is telling the truth.
So what? (Score:3)
Maybe that's true. But on the linked (not yet peer-reviewed) article, that the rates of breakthrough covid among the vaccinated are "very low (highest rate is 1.5%".
In addition, "individuals who were previously infected who received one dose of the Pfizer vaccine were even more protected from breakthrough infection than the naturally infected group."
So even in this one article, there's no downside to everybody getting the shot.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.or... [hopkinsmedicine.org]
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/... [nejm.org]
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/v... [cdc.gov]
Unless you plan on getting booster cases of covid to refresh the natural immunity...
Re: (Score:3)
According to those who have actually done the research, not in a meaningful sense, no.
Interesting...
https://www.medrxiv.org/conten... [medrxiv.org]
https://www.cell.com/cell-repo... [cell.com]
https://www.biorxiv.org/conten... [biorxiv.org]
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/... [nejm.org]
This reference is saying natural infection is effective.
"The efficacy of natural infection against reinfection, which was derived by comparing the incidence rate in both cohorts, was estimated at 92.3% (95% CI, 90.3 to 93.8) for the beta variant and at 97.6% (95% CI, 95.7 to 98.7) for the alpha variant. "
Not that any variant except Omicron is relevant anymore or that reinfection is even a useful
Re: (Score:2)
Are you trolling? The only actual research you directly link says the opposite of what you claim?
"Protection by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection against reinfection with the beta variant was observed, even 1 year after the primary infection, but protection was slightly lower than that against the alpha variant and wild-type virus circulating in Qatar.3-5 These findings give some insights into the hypothesis that natural immunity may provide protection against known variants of concern."
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Wrong
2. Wrong again but you obviously don't get vaccines or viruses. No one EVER, ever said it was a cure but a vaccine to prevent what it can prevent which is you dying.
3. Wrong again, we are not immune to this any more than we are immune to the Flu. No one said this ever that actually researches and I don't mean youtube/blogs but folks in labs DOING research.
4. Bullshit. Folks do not die at this rate from most other viruses.
5. Only you do not understand the human immune system enough to produce a vaccine. This isn't a live vaccine so again, you're wrong.
STOP researching via Youtube, blogs, and sites with agendas other than protecting human health. It's a waste of everyone's time. Yours for reading this crap and ours for having to see your posts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:5, Funny)
I am constantly amazed at the number of people who received their medical training at the QAnon University School of Medicine.
Re: (Score:2)
Or the Facebook School of Medical Science an' Shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Meta Sciency, that's an MS, that's like, almost a doctor! That means the link they posted is proven right.
Re: (Score:2)
The conspiracy theorists are somewhat less surprising to me than the number of people who confuse dentists with epidemiologists.
But even otherwise-rational people here on slashdot confuse pediatric clinicians with epidemiologists, so I guess it is just harder than I expected.
I still remember in the 1990s when the right wingers were fantasizing about a worldwide pandemic, and the hippies not obeying the quarantine, and how the military would just start shooting them, because civil rights are temporarily susp
Re:How about natural immunity. (Score:4, Informative)
The vaccine simply prepares your immune system by giving it a head start. It's not the vaccine protecting you. It's you. Your immune system.
Agreed, that's a reply I keep ready for when someone would invoke the argument that vaccines are unnatural (some people think biotechnology = bad). There is nothing unnatural in vaccines, it's just a safer way to naturally train our immune system (rather than immunity caused by catching the live virus first).
Also the vaccine giving a headstart is sometimes the difference between life and death. That's how much vaccines are cool.
Re: (Score:2)
Also remind people that living to a ripe old age is also unnatural.
Re: (Score:2)
Next you'll be posting that "Q" WilL sAvE uS frOm ThE vIRuS!!1!
BTW, shouldn't you be in Dallas, waiting for JFK to miraculously reappear and save us from the evil Democrats?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Wait, you don't still think that this is about the virus, do you?
Someone else provided links, which are hilarious when read together. The NEJM article estimates that natural immunity is in the neighborhood of 95% protective. Hopkins says that vaccination is 2 to 5 times more effective.
Put those two together, and understand that Intel is getting ready to fire hundreds of people over a percent or two difference in risk.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, you don't still think that this is about the virus, do you?
Someone else provided links, which are hilarious when read together. The NEJM article estimates that natural immunity is in the neighborhood of 95% protective. Hopkins says that vaccination is 2 to 5 times more effective.
Put those two together, and understand that Intel is getting ready to fire hundreds of people over a percent or two difference in risk.
Liability, plain and simple. And before you scoff, and call bullshit, make no mistake - People are suing hospitals that refuse to treat patients with ivermectin.
Knowing this, and with at-will employment as law, I'd do the same. No vaccine? no proof? Have nice day, but you have 15 minutes to empty your desk, and will be escorted out of the building by security - This would be a claim that allowing unvaccinated in my company building exposes the company to liability - I would use the legal system to protec
Re: (Score:2)
What liability? Suing hospitals for the right to try a treatment that the hospital disapproves of after the hospital's approved treatment has failed does not translate into liability for employers. Before 2019, had anyone ever imagined that an employer might be liable for an ordinary virus? Anyone ever get sued for someone maybe getting a cold at work?
Before 2019, the only notions of employer liability for viruses came from virology labs, medical workers with exposure to blood-borne viruses, and employer
Re: (Score:3)
What liability? Suing hospitals for the right to try a treatment that the hospital disapproves of after the hospital's approved treatment has failed does not translate into liability for employers.
Failed? Speak to us about failure. Coming into a hospital unvaccinated, and believing that Cattle Dewormer, Malaria treatment, or gargling with Betadine will be the cure - You can always go to a hospital that will treat you in the way that you demand. Having the patient control the treatment other than accepting or refusing is a prescription for utter chaos, speaking of liability.
If people want QAnon treaments, go to a QAnon run Hospital.
If an employer creates a dangerous situation in the workplace, the
Re: (Score:3)
You do understand "cattle dewormer" was given to humans for anti-viral/bacterial/fungal/parasite treatments for quite a while before it went off patent and thus became cheap enough for animal use?
Ivermectin at a proper dose has a medical use. But it is as an antiparasitic.
Previous wunderdrug of the alternate world sect hydrochloroquinone has a medical use for arthritis, lupus and malaria.
That these drugs serve a known purpose is not in question.
The levels of Ivermectin required to have an effect on the Covid-19 virus are toxic to humans.
This is the issue. Lot's of chemicals will inactivate or destroy the virus. They can also do great harm to the person foolishly taking them.
Re: (Score:2)
California has solid at-will employment laws; the only time they aren't at-will is when you've committed some kind of crime related to employment like wage theft. In those cases you can actually be forced to rehire people who have filed complaints, in theory anyway. I don't have the statistics in my pocket.
In general though if they just don't want to employ you any more they can let you go any time. It does affect their unemployment insurance tax rate if you collect UI, however and et cetera.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
vaccines are more effective
This may be true, but more to the point they are more *safe* and effective.
Getting immunity through a vaccine is safe, you won't get seriously ill or die, and your immune response is ready to cope.
Getting immunity through getting sick means you obviously have to face the possibility of serious illness or death, which is the whole point.
The only context where the 'natural immunity' argument can reasonably hold up is in cases where you can catch it young and it's relatively safe to get immunity before you cat
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The very first Omicron death in the US was an unvaccinated man who was also previously infected. [axios.com]
There's literally no reason not to get the shot by now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or like yourself not be fully aware of the fact that Omicron is also re-infecting people that had a covid infection.
"Think rationally" - We do my hysteric friend, this is why we read the articles to the end and don't stop at the point that vaccinated people can be infected and transmit the desease.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Most people with HPV never realize it. Well, until they drop dead of cancer a couple of decades later. Thing is, Covid hasn't been around a couple of decades so we simply don't know what the long-term effects are -- even for those who are symptomless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Add in a lawsuit and you'll get a nice bonus courtesy of Intel Legal!
Company rules. You don't want to follow them, out the door you go.
Re:Quite a distinction (Score:4, Insightful)
Company rules. You don't want to follow them, out the door you go.
Pretty sure forcing medical treatments on people goes well beyond an ask to file your TPS reports on time.
The rewards from people suing over vaccine mandates will be absolutely stunning.
There is no force at all. Remember at-will? This was a great way to bust unions, and enforce total supplication to the employer.
'Pretty sure" that no one is forcing anyone to get the jab - they are just legally saying that employees need to be vaccinated. There is a huge difference. No one is forcing anyone to be an Intel employee, but just like you obey the other policies, you obey this one.
As far as lawsuits, considering the fact that people and families of the dead who have contracted serious Covid 19 are suing hospitals for not treating the dear departed with ivermectin, it is a liability move to get these people out of the workplace. If someone contracts it at work, yeah, they'll be able to sue.
Re:Quite a distinction (Score:4, Informative)
They're not 'forcing' anyone to do anything, but nice try at framing it that way.
The fact is they can make rules about who they employ, just like any company.
For example, some companies require a college degree for certain positions, but they're not 'forcing' you to get one.
UPS says you have to be able to lift 40lbs. If you can't do that, you can't work as a delivery driver or package sorter. They're not forcing you to go to the gym, you just can't work there.
Some people are hard of hearing, but you're hard of thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not 'forcing' anyone to do anything, but nice try at framing it that way.
I have to agree. Nobody is forcing you not to commit grand theft auto. Neither are they forcing you to avoid using ceramic insulators on telephone poles as target practice while rolling down the street in your smoking hot ride. There are just legal consequences and the small matter of prison but there is no force involved.
You are absolutely free to do absolutely anything you want because forcing means physically making you. Anything short of that is not really forcing.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless an employee is under contract, Intel is not under any obligation to continue employing them. There's a long list of reasons upon which you cannot discriminate in employment, but 'vaccination status' isn't on it.
Some of them may try to *claim* one of those impermissible reasons, but Intel is creating a very public paper trail demonstrating their intentions. The only way this causes them problems is if they muck around too much with
Re: (Score:2)
For at least half a century now every single state in the union has required children to get certain vaccines (varies by state) in order to go to public school. That's basically a vaccine mandate for everyone who doesnt have affluent parents since legally kids have to go to school.
It's funny how all of a sudden people have a problem with these things.
The rewards from people suing over vaccine mandates will be absolutely stunning.
How do you come to that conclusion? Any mandate is pretty much guaranteed to go through the courts via red state lawsuits before being implemented. If it's re
Re:Wow three month vacation! (Score:4, Interesting)
I would take that three month grace period to find an employer that respects the rights of employees to make choices about their own bodies, while enjoying the free health care coverage. Add in a lawsuit and you'll get a nice bonus courtesy of Intel Legal!
I think it's fairly obvious that Intel management is encouraging the holdouts to find other employment. Good luck to them in finding a company that wants to hire people who don't like to comply with company policy. Maybe they can work for that My Pillow guy, though his hero just came out publicly in support of vaccination, so maybe not. Over 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, including nearly 40% of the ones making $100k or more per year, so taking 3 months to find another job may not be an option for a lot of them. By the way, those are pre-pandemic statistics, for what it's worth.
As to the lawsuit angle, well, anyone can file a lawsuit over anything they wish, if they can find a lawyer willing to represent them or they want to represent themselves. Winning such a suit is another matter. I'm curious as to exactly what the legal basis for such a suit would be, though. I doubt that being afraid of vaccination qualifies one as a member of a protected class. Of course, a lot of people aren't afraid of vaccination; they just don't want to be told what to do. Curious attitude for a law-abiding citizen who works for a living, and pays taxes. At this flaming instant, the Biden's vaccination mandate is in force; if it stays that way I can't see successfully suing a company for complying with it.
Re:The non sheep always fare better (Score:4, Insightful)
Really no need to wish them good luck at all with the kind of worker shortages we currently have. It will be no trouble finding other employment, including with other chip design companies.
LOL, you couldn't be more wrong. No company of any size is going to hire plague rats, period.
It's a bad economic gamble to have your employees susceptible to something that can incapacitate or them, and they know that. Duh.
AMD, Micron, Samsung, Broadcomm, Mitsubishi, TSMC, Hynix, Qualcomm, NVIDIA, Texas Instruments, Fairchild, IBM, Sony, etc etc etc, they ALL require vaccination.
Even the vaccine disinformation spreaders at FOX News insist that their employees be vaccinated. HELLO?
Maybe they could get jobs at Grandma's Olde Fashioned Semikonducter Kompany, but I doubt it.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't have that much trouble hiring janitors and technicians. They pay well and have excellent benefits. They're a popular place to work.
The shortages they have are in educated workers. Most educated workers don't want to work with unvaccinated morons. Without a vaccine requirement, they'll lose their most important workers to places that do have vaccine requirements.
Re: (Score:2)
Those refusing the vaccine are the least intelligent.
Re:Wow three month vacation! (Score:5, Insightful)
I would take that three month grace period to find an employer that respects the rights of employees to make choices about their own bodies
As opposed to an employer that respects the rights of employees to have a safe working environment?
Delusion (Score:2)
As opposed to an employer that respects the rights of employees to have a safe working environment?.
Do please explain to us all how it's a "safer working environment" when a remote-only employee is required to be vaccinated?
Are you worried you can catch Covid over Zoom? That would generally fit with the intellectual profile of those that demand vaccine mandates.
Re: (Score:2)
People who are hospitalized or dead really can't contribute much to the company, whether they're a remote worker or not.
Having staff that can actually, you know, do the job required of them is highly desirable.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure Intel would happily let you go to, considering they have the health of their other 110,000 employees to look after.
Re: (Score:2)
I think dumping anti-vaxxers on China constitutes crimes against humanity ain't it?
Do you tell lies? (Score:2)
Because he commented under this video - 3 hrs. ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
The video about the killed pedestrian you posted is 5 hrs. old.