6 ms·
Why would they? They are interested in reminding the workers who the boss is, who fires who for any reason, and who tells you what to put into your body if you
by throwawayfear 5y ago
Why would they? They are interested in reminding the workers who the boss is, who fires who for any reason, and who tells you what to put into your body if you want to put bread on your table.
The shareholders should fire every single person who is pushing these policies, if they want to retain their best talent. Why are flight attendants being treated like pets or animals while some fat cat boss on an island somewhere sips on expensive wine and laughs?
- meepmorp 5y agoIs this satire?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- help_quanted 5y agoIf by best talent you mean anti-vaxxers that lack critical thinking skills, then sure.
- Latty 5y agoAn employer that allows some employees to endanger others is negligent, most importantly in terms of ethics, but also in terms of productivity. Your right to swing your fist ends at my face. If you want to work with people, you have to take reasonable measures not to harm them. An employer that is willing to tell me to come in to work with people who refuse to get vaccinated is one that doesn't care about my well-being, and one I don't want to work for.
- asguy 5y agoIf the vaccine and masks work, why do people who have taken it and wear them, need to worry? What is this narrative we’re pushing today? You’re acting like by not taking the vaccine, they’re directly violating people who did take it. How do you square that circle? P.S. I’m vaccinated. I’m also not worried about being around people who aren’t.
- Latty 5y agoThis is like asking why if seatbelts work, we don't let people drunk drive (obviously drunk driving is more dangerous than being unvaccinated, not claiming it's a perfect 1:1 analogy, before people complain, just making the point that just because we have safeguards doesn't mean we can ignore the core issue). Vaccines and masks work, but they aren't 100% effective. The effectiveness of vaccines is far higher if everyone who can be vaccinated is, as the protective effect is multiplicative. There are people who can't be vaccinated, or who are at higher risk, and people who are just unlucky. They don't have a choice. They are affected by other's choices. The "personal responsibility" narrative is nonsense when it comes to communicable diseases.
- short12 5y agoIs drunk driving more dangerous than being unvaccinated? Just glancing at the stats drunk driving is significantly safer than being unvaccinated
- Latty 5y agoI honestly don't know, my instinct is that in terms of danger to others (which was the topic at hand) it probably is, but either way, that wasn't really relevant to my point.
- short12 5y agoIt is definitely relevant to your point because assumptions are being made about which has a worse outcome. Turns out on the national level drunk driving is a pittance vs unvaccinated. To bad they don't have equal liability
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]