Lionel Hutz Posted December 13, 2021 Report Share Posted December 13, 2021 On 12/10/2021 at 5:02 PM, Fara Fasat said: Thanks. Could you also provide the link to the page this was on? I've been using https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/class_deviations.html and https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/ops/policy_vault.html but the memo was on neither. It is listed here: https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pacc/cc/COVID-19.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted December 17, 2021 Report Share Posted December 17, 2021 Bloomberg Law has reported that a federal district court in Louisiana has issued yet another (third) preliminary injunction against the vaccine mandate. It applies to Lousiana, Mississippi, and Indiana. https://www.constangy.com/assets/htmldocuments/Vax.Contractors.Louisiana v. Biden 12.16.21.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WifWaf Posted December 18, 2021 Report Share Posted December 18, 2021 The stay on OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard is dissolved. OSHA can mandate employers with 100 or more employees be vaccinated or tested. The Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit opinion, issued today, is viewable here: https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/21a0287p-06.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel hoffman Posted December 18, 2021 Report Share Posted December 18, 2021 On 12/17/2021 at 8:05 PM, WifWaf said: The stay on OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard is dissolved. OSHA can mandate employers with 100 or more employees be vaccinated or tested. The Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit opinion, issued today, is viewable here: https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/21a0287p-06.pdf Judge J. Larsen delivered the dissenting decision on pp 39-57. The dissent opinion is very compelling regarding certain aspects of the OSHA rule, in particular to rules beyond the workplace (e.g., OSHA’s authority is limited to workplace safety - not remotely, home based work). In addition, it addresses weaknesses in OSHA’s determination of the existence of “grave danger”. Looks like there may be grounds for appeal… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WifWaf Posted January 23, 2022 Report Share Posted January 23, 2022 On 12/18/2021 at 7:32 AM, joel hoffman said: The dissent opinion is very compelling regarding certain aspects of the OSHA rule, in particular to rules beyond the workplace Yup, SCOTUS sided with you here. There is no precedent for a permanent alteration of our bodies as a requirement for work (my words). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel hoffman Posted January 23, 2022 Report Share Posted January 23, 2022 8 hours ago, WifWaf said: Yup, SCOTUS sided with you here. There is no precedent for a permanent alteration of our bodies as a requirement for work. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf It is also interesting that employees of companies with less than 100 employees don’t pose a “grave danger” to their fellow employees or to the general public. From Newsweek magazine: “According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, a total of 98.1 percent of companies in the U.S. employ fewer than 100 people, with companies with less than than 10 employees accounting for 78.4 percent.” Reported “BY EWAN PALMER ON 9/10/21 AT 9:06 AM EDT” There is a ton of general interaction with the general public by employees of small firms or self employed persons. So why should only certain company employees face mandatory vaccination or be subject to testing or termination?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel Hutz Posted April 8, 2022 Report Share Posted April 8, 2022 Aaaaaand we're back on... https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/04/appeals-court-reinstates-bidens-vaccine-mandate-federal-employees/365413/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REA'n Maker Posted October 14, 2022 Report Share Posted October 14, 2022 Gosh. Who would have ever predicted such a debacle? On 10/8/2021 at 1:50 PM, REA'n Maker said: I predict this ends badly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF-SA Posted October 20, 2022 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2022 On 10/14/2022 at 9:08 AM, REA'n Maker said: Gosh. Who would have ever predicted such a debacle? Looks like the story is about to get even better! Only time will tell. https://www.saferfederalworkforce.gov/contractors/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REA'n Maker Posted October 21, 2022 Report Share Posted October 21, 2022 Quote "....agencies should not: (1) take any steps to require covered contractors and subcontractors to come into compliance with previously issued Task Force guidance; or (2) enforce any contract clauses implementing Executive Order 14042." So now presumably the concept of "unenforceable clauses" will be taught in CON 090. And Pfizer has just admitted they had zero data proving that vaccinations slowed the spread of the virus which was the alleged impetus behind the entire EO. This is why we can't have nice things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.