6 ms·

It doesn't, that's the point. The mandate presumably would have been legal if Adams hadn't added those arbitrary exemptions.

busymom0 4y ago
Doubt it. The court also said the following (court towards the end indicates that the mandate didn’t make sense even when the order was issued): > “”Being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting Covid-19. As of the day of this Decision, CDC guidelines regarding quarantine and isolation are the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. The Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves. We have learned through the course of the pandemic that the vaccine against Covid-19 is not absolute. Breakthrough cases occur, even for those who have been vaccinated and boosted. President Joseph Biden has said that the pandemic is over.& The State of New York ended the Covid-19 state of emergency over a month ago.? As this Court stated in its decision in the Rivicci matter, this is not a commentary on the efficacy of vaccination, but about how we are treating our first responders, the ones who worked day-to-day through the height of the pandemic. See Rivicci v. NYC Fire Dept., Index No. 85131/2022. They worked without protective gear. They were infected with Covid-19, creating natural immunity. They continued working full duty while their exemption requests were pending. They were terminated and are willing to come back to work for the City that cast them aside. The vaccination mandate for City employees was not just about safety and public health: it was about compliance. If it was about safety and public health, unvaccinated workers would have been placed on leave the moment the order was issued. If it was about safety and public health, the Health Commissioner would have issued city-wide mandates for vaccination for all residents. In a City with a nearly 80% vaccination rate, we shouldn't be penalizing the people who showed up to work, at great risk to themselves and their families, while we were locked down. If it was about safety and public health, no one would be exempt. It is time for the City of New York to do what is right and what is just.” Source: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=JK5E3gx5XV1/ku37jnWR_PLUS_w==&system=prod&TSPD_101_R0=08533cd43fab2000a714a7fbca6ed5d92c9e780c98ea524c4b9b8701764b487905955c017542ac48080139dd47144800dda62d59b1ba02692121c6b4f86f53b4130e01eca4d9e4b1c8054784ce120d336736ccac0abbaf37b8d4ad9aa7103ddbd641ea04a53032d77d7903f1ad7a1b06abd1dac1cfde96f2 https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet...
- jquery 4y ago
  Yikes. This reads like a gish-gallop of anti-vax talking points. I don’t even necessarily disagree with the decision to reinstate the employees, but this legal reasoning is embarrassing. Edit: I’m happy to learn that the New York Supreme Court is not the highest court in New York, this entire thread is misleading (I think people are assuming New York’s highest court slapped down vaccine mandates). I don’t know why New York has to name their courts in such weird ways…
  - tlogan 4y ago
    I think it is important to understand that not all people who against vax mandates are anti-vaxers.
    - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
      I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree. Vaccines offer some personal protection but predominantly become effective by achieving herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy undermines this goal and weakens the system. Being pro-vaccine is senseless without being in favor of enough people being vaccinated to provide strong immunity, including for those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical complications. Even if you were to argue on behalf of one who is indifferent to vaccines but is against mandates, so long as those mandates encourage vaccination, they effectively are discouraging vaccination and are thus anti-vax. It can be hard to recognize all of this without the right perspective. In isolation, it is easy to claim that one is not anti-vax; however actions speak infinitely louder than words.
      - ghoward 4y ago
        This argument is useless in the face of the COVID shots because they do not prevent transmission, an important factor in herd immunity being effective. Being anti-vax-mandate for an ineffective vaccine is not anti-vax in any way.
        xyzzy_plugh 4y ago

busymom0 4y ago

Doubt it. The court also said the following (court towards the end indicates that the mandate didn’t make sense even when the order was issued): > “”Being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting Covid-19. As of the day of this Decision, CDC guidelines regarding quarantine and isolation are the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. The Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves. We have learned through the course of the pandemic that the vaccine against Covid-19 is not absolute. Breakthrough cases occur, even for those who have been vaccinated and boosted. President Joseph Biden has said that the pandemic is over.& The State of New York ended the Covid-19 state of emergency over a month ago.? As this Court stated in its decision in the Rivicci matter, this is not a commentary on the efficacy of vaccination, but about how we are treating our first responders, the ones who worked day-to-day through the height of the pandemic. See Rivicci v. NYC Fire Dept., Index No. 85131/2022. They worked without protective gear. They were infected with Covid-19, creating natural immunity. They continued working full duty while their exemption requests were pending. They were terminated and are willing to come back to work for the City that cast them aside. The vaccination mandate for City employees was not just about safety and public health: it was about compliance. If it was about safety and public health, unvaccinated workers would have been placed on leave the moment the order was issued. If it was about safety and public health, the Health Commissioner would have issued city-wide mandates for vaccination for all residents. In a City with a nearly 80% vaccination rate, we shouldn't be penalizing the people who showed up to work, at great risk to themselves and their families, while we were locked down. If it was about safety and public health, no one would be exempt. It is time for the City of New York to do what is right and what is just.” Source: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=JK5E3gx5XV1/ku37jnWR_PLUS_w==&system=prod&TSPD_101_R0=08533cd43fab2000a714a7fbca6ed5d92c9e780c98ea524c4b9b8701764b487905955c017542ac48080139dd47144800dda62d59b1ba02692121c6b4f86f53b4130e01eca4d9e4b1c8054784ce120d336736ccac0abbaf37b8d4ad9aa7103ddbd641ea04a53032d77d7903f1ad7a1b06abd1dac1cfde96f2 https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet...

jquery 4y ago
Yikes. This reads like a gish-gallop of anti-vax talking points. I don’t even necessarily disagree with the decision to reinstate the employees, but this legal reasoning is embarrassing. Edit: I’m happy to learn that the New York Supreme Court is not the highest court in New York, this entire thread is misleading (I think people are assuming New York’s highest court slapped down vaccine mandates). I don’t know why New York has to name their courts in such weird ways…
- tlogan 4y ago
  I think it is important to understand that not all people who against vax mandates are anti-vaxers.
  - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
    I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree. Vaccines offer some personal protection but predominantly become effective by achieving herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy undermines this goal and weakens the system. Being pro-vaccine is senseless without being in favor of enough people being vaccinated to provide strong immunity, including for those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical complications. Even if you were to argue on behalf of one who is indifferent to vaccines but is against mandates, so long as those mandates encourage vaccination, they effectively are discouraging vaccination and are thus anti-vax. It can be hard to recognize all of this without the right perspective. In isolation, it is easy to claim that one is not anti-vax; however actions speak infinitely louder than words.
    - ghoward 4y ago
      This argument is useless in the face of the COVID shots because they do not prevent transmission, an important factor in herd immunity being effective. Being anti-vax-mandate for an ineffective vaccine is not anti-vax in any way.
      - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago