3 ms·
Not to mention this should not even be required given the supreme court struct down the vaccine mandate for everything except medicare/medicaid facilities. [1]
by LinuxBender 5y ago
Not to mention this should not even be required given the supreme court struct down the vaccine mandate for everything except medicare/medicaid facilities. [1]
[Edit] Apparently federal facilities were not challenged. So only struck down for businesses.
[1] - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-blocks-biden-vaccine-or-test-policy-large-businesses-2022-01-13/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-blocks-bid...
- dragonwriter 5y ago> Not to mention this should not even be required given the supreme court struct down the vaccine mandate for everything except medicare/medicaid facilities False. There were at least three federal mandates: (1) Federal workforce, (2) Federally-funded healthcare facilities, (3) Large businesses In recent Supreme Court decisions in cases challenging #2 and #3, #3 was struck down and #2 was upheld, #1 was not challenged in those cases. This database is concerned with #1, since it's an employee database for an agency within the federal government (hence why the employee database has a federal register notice.)
- LinuxBender 5y agoThankyou for the clarification and correcting my misunderstanding.
- foolinaround 5y agothis mandate covers far more than federal employees. In this case, the mandate covers even contractors working for companies that have a federal contract in place, even if they or even their division has nothing to do with the contract. Eg, several big banks are covered by #1, the way it is written. These banks have as their contractors, large consulting companies - which now enforce on their end.