Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...