Those FDA approved vaccines are unbelievably battle tested across the world at this stage…If you ain’t happy to take them now that is your decision.
If you dont want to take them in the knowledge that your health insurance premium will go up, again, that’s your decision.
I expect all European countries will ditch the internal covid passports within a few months. The international travel vaccination requirement or vaccination for certain workforce members will probably remain for a long time.
You are potentially doing the same thing you accuse the vaccine supported of doing here , fear mongering.
First of all that is one paper from the US that has not been peer reviewed yet. UK’s own estimates are an incidence of six per million …It’s something to look into for sure, but it’s only one paper that hasn’t even been published yet.
Second 'the damage is permanent ', do you have evidence for that ?
I’d agree with the decision of actuaries, for sure. Politicians less so.
It’s entirely possible that the paper is fraudulent. It happens. However this is UC, not some tinpot establishment in Moldova. These guys probably aren’t going to jeopardize their careers by making up data. The fact that the authorities previously reported a lower rate doesn’t constitute robust disproof. If you think there is some mundane explanation for the observed high rate of myocarditis, let’s hear it.
Your heart muscle is unique in that it has a very limited ability to repair itself; it works around damage rather than repairing it. I’m sure you know this. Of course there are degrees of myocarditis and some instances will be clinically insignificant, but the paper observed people who were hospitalized. Those instances were probably not insignificant.
Plus we don’t know about undiagnosed heart problems that we currently have no idea about.
I suppose the question is should we put children at uneccessary risk for a possible greater good. I believe we shouldn’t.
Exactly. The research is ongoing; people don’t really know how bad the future consequences of this sort of thing are likely to be. We can take an educated guess, that’s all. Since 12-15 year old boys simply aren’t at risk from COVID (the paper states something like a RR of 0.3 compared to vaccination), there seems to be no rational argument for pressuring them into vaccination.
Also worth pointing out that this paper is investigating only one identified side effect. The risk of serious side effects in general may be many times higher than 1:6000. But again, we don’t know … because after six months of vaccination rollout, the effort to find these things out has largely fallen on the shoulders of institutional researchers rather than the pharma companies.
And the posters who are arguing that children get regularly vaccinated against other illnesses miss the point that children need those vaccines. They are at significant risk. Virtually no children need the Covid vaccine.
I don’t want to get emotive about this in the way that the granny killer accusers were last year, but it’s becoming hard not to.
Same here. I find it really, really hard to have conversations about doing this sort of thing to kids without getting upset about it. We’re basically talking about treating kids - their bodies and minds - as public property.
A few years ago nobody would have seriously suggested that kids should be put at some risk in order to (hypothetically - there isn’t any scientific reason to believe that it’s true) protect adults. People would have looked at him like he was crazy. And yet here we are.
Even those genuinely-useful childhood vaccines are treated with a certain amount of respect, and the risks and benefits for the child have been carefully weighed.
It’s to stop the spread innit…
Funny how ‘conspiracies’ are actually being carried out by government gophers.
Seriously? In my case at least the argument is in the context of serious side effects. As in, what vaccines, including Covid vaccines, don’t have serious side effects? Should they all be banned, including the ones children are required to get to attend school as they all have documented serious side effects too?
(Crickets . . . )
No, that’s not what happens with antibiotic resistant bacteria and not taking your full course. If you don’t finish a course of antibiotics, any ‘leftover’ bacteria without resistance don’t “come back with a resistance” (what are we, lamarckians?). The issue is that there may be some that are already somewhat resistant that aren’t killed but may have been with a full course, that are then left to reproduce and become dominant (and strengthening as the cycle repeats).
If someone is arguing for banning vaccines, I haven’t heard it. And you seem to have missed BD’s point regarding the seriousness of the potential harm to children for the other diseases for which we vaccinate. Seeing as that is half of the weighting of risks and benefits, it seems not a small point.
the LA School District board members don’t share that view.
Jab the students or home-school them is what they’ve (basically) mandated.
| Country | In the context of “return to work”: does your country allow employers to impose vaccination? | Are there criteria to be met to impose vaccination and what could be the consequences for employees who decide not to get vaccinated? |
|---|---|---|
| AFGHANISTAN | No. | The Afghani laws do not provide for employers to mandate employees for vaccination against Covid-19. However, public authorities have encouraged people to get vaccinated. |
| ARGENTINA | No. | Vaccination remains voluntarily; thus, as a general rule employers are not entitled to force vaccination. Imposing such an obligation might be deemed illegal and have consequences under Labor Law. |
| AUSTRALIA | Employers have no general right to demand their workers get accinated. | Employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination from their employees, unless the workers are in identified ‘high risk’ industries (eg, aged care and hospitals), or other limited exceptions apply. — The exceptions will be looked at on a case by case basis, including consideration of what vaccination it is, and where they work, etc. — Some individual States (eg, New South Wales) are looking at introducing requirements, but these have not yet progressed |
| BELGIUM | No. In Belgium, employers are not allowed to impose vaccination on their employees before returning to the workspace. | Upon now, Belgium has decided not to impose vaccination against the Covid-19 virus. Everyone remains free to choose whether or not to take the Covid-19 vaccine. However, it is strongly recommended to be vaccinated in order to achieve group immunity. The government decided to give priority to certain groups (health workers, elderly people, persons with an increased risk, etc.) — In order to allow employers to impose/ask their employees to get vaccinated, a legal basis must be adopted. If an employer nowadays asks its employees to prove whether they are vaccinated, this will be against the rules of data protection. The rules of labour law that oblige employers to ensure safety in the workplace are not considered as an exception to this principle either. — Employees who decide not to be vaccinated should not be adversely affected by this choice. The choice still remains free. |
| BOLIVIA | No. | Employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination from their employees. Medical professionals have been the first to be vaccinated back in March - April, 2021. Currently the jabs schedule has covered ages from 80 to 40 and today vaccination of the 30 year group has been activated. |
| BRAZIL | Yes. This is according to recent guidelines from the Public Labour Prosecution Office, although there is no provision under Brazilian law | Employers may use their directive power and dismiss an employee who refused to be vaccinated with just cause upon prior (i) inclusion of vaccination in the company’s Occupational Health Medical Control Program (PCMSO), (ii) information to employees on the requirements under the PCMSO and the consequences of rejecting vaccination, (iii) employees’ guidance on the scientific evidence and safety of the vaccine, and (iv) clinical evaluation of employees by the occupational physician. — Dismissal with cause is always the maximum penalty, so the employer must first understand the reason why that employee is refusing to be vaccinated, considering their political and religious convictions and their social context, and then try to clarify any doubts and/or insecurities of the employee. Thus, if even after all the attempts the employee persists in his refusal, the employer can adopt the dismissal with cause with greater certainty and then demonstrate that his attitude was based on common sense and reasonableness, always ensuring the collective safety of the staff. |
| COLOMBIA | No. | There is no clear criteria by which vaccination to COVID-19 can be imposed by employers in Colombia: — Decree 109/2021 (National Vaccination Plan against COVID-19) does not impose an obligation to get the vaccine, as it focuses on prioritizing the groups that will need to get the vaccine. — The Decree 660/2021 (June 18) and Resolution 840/2021 (June 22) focus on strategies by means of which private companies (and state companies that have a private regime) can acquire vaccines to offer them to their employees and families. — Although COVID-19 vaccines are not mandatory, the General National Vaccination Plan (Law 1626/2013, applicable for other vaccines) in Colombia states that vaccination is mandatory and free of charge. |
| CZECH REPUBLIC | No. | Employers may use their directive Although employees in some industries (social and medical professions) are highly recommended to be vaccinated, there is no legal duty to do so. |
| FINLAND | No. Employer may not impose vaccination in general. | Employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination from the employees. Regarding healthcare professionals some narrow exceptions may imply, but this does not apply to Covid-19. Highly recommend. |
| FRANCE | No. Employer shall not impose vaccination in general… | Based on the fact that (1) vaccination against Covid -19 is not mandatory by law and (2) such kind of information is a sensitve data, employers have no right to require proof of vaccination from the employees. Regarding healthcare professionals some narrow exceptions may imply but this does not apply to Covid-19. Vaccination is nevertheless strongly recommended. |
| GERMANY | No. | In nursing or some other medical professions, staff who have not been vaccinated sometimes cannot do their work because the risk for the patients would be too high (intensive care units, cancer units etc.). Although employees in these areas are highly recommended to be vaccinated, there is no legal duty to do so. |
| HONG KONG | In general, no. — There is currently no legislation or case precedent relating to whether employers can impose vaccination obligations on their employees, apart from the duty to provide a safe working environment for their employees. — However, under Hong Kong legislation, the government has implemented measures for certain businesses such as restaurants and bars, which can increase operation levels to different “operating modes” only if their staff are vaccinated, with the exemption of those who are unfit to get vaccinated to get a Covid-19 test every week instead. Depending on the circumstances, employers of these businesses may be entitled to impose a vaccination obligation on those employees who are medically fit to get one. — The government has not issued any regulation mandating Covid-19 vaccination for office workers although this does not preclude the government from doing so in the future. | Imposing vaccination obligations will depend on whether the requirement is “reasonable”. Employers have a common law and statutory duty to be reasonable and prudent in providing a safe working environment.The statutory duty also includes the duty to provide a workplace without risks to health - however only “so far as reasonably practicable.” “Reasonably practicable” requires a holistic proportionality exercise of the benefits of the precaution against the feasibility of implementing it, as well as economic and time costs. — If the risk to health is obvious or predictable, then imposing a vaccination requirement may be reasonable. However, this is highly fact sensitive. Similarly, employees must comply with a “lawful and reasonable” direction from their employers to avoid a breach of their contract which may result in termination. The lack of any precedent on mandatory vaccinations makes it difficult to assess what is to be deemed as “reasonable.” — Under the current rules applying to bars and restaurants, it may be that depending on the risks of contracting Covid-19 and the contractual terms of their employment, employers of certain industries may be able to impose a vaccination obligation. |
| INDIA | No. | While Indian courts have recognised that COVID vaccinations are the need of the hour, a recent High Court judgment suggests that vaccination by force or being made mandatory by adopting coercive methods, vitiates the very fundamental purpose of the welfare attached to it. — Further, the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, which is the regulatory authority overseeing COVID-19 management in India, has also clarified that obtaining the vaccine is optional and voluntary. — Presently, there is no prescribed criteria which needs to be met to permit or allow mandatory imposition of the vaccine. Employees who choose not to get vaccinated may be required to work from home till such time that the pandemic tapers down. It is reasonably unlikely that a court of law will accept any other remedial action which an employer may propose against an employee who chooses to not receive the vaccine. |
| INDONESIA | No. But according to the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Regulation Number 10 of 2021 (MHR 10/2021), every person who has been designated as the target recipient of the COVID-19 Vaccine based on the data collection of the target recipient of the COVID-19 Vaccine, both for Program Vaccination and Mutual Cooperation Vaccination, must participate in the COVID-19 Vaccination in accordance with the provisions of the legislation | Yes, there’s a criteria and also priorities for vaccination. Vaccination is carried out in several stages in Indonesia and there are several criteria to be vaccinated. According to the Article 8 of the MHR 10/2021 the stage of giving vaccinations to priority groups of recipients of COVID-19 vaccines, which are as follows: — health workers, assistants for health workers, and supporting staff working in Health Service Facilities; — the elderly and public service personnel/officers; — vulnerable people from geospatial, social, and economic aspects; — other communities. |
| ISRAEL | No general right to compel employees to be vaccinated | Most of the adult population in Israel was vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Overall, about 6.4 million Israelis (90% of the grown up population included) either received the two vaccine shots or recovered from CVOID-19. The number amounts roughly to ⅔ of the population. — Some employers impose limitations on employees who refuse to be vaccinated. They may be required to work from home or use up their unspent paid leave. — The Israeli Civil Service Rules provide that in some cases, the Civil Service Administration may ask an employee to present a green badge or negative COVID-19 test results if it determines this to be necessary for managing work arrangements in the unit or office. — While an employer cannot compel an employee to get vaccinated or undergo CVOID-19 tests, an employee’s refusal to do so may have consequences on their employment. For example, in a case brought before the regional labor court in Tel-Aviv, the court held that unvaccinated workers are allowed to present a negative COVID-19 test every 72 hours. An employee who refuses to present this may be forced to use their unspent paid leave if it is not possible to ask them to work from home. If the employee does not agree to either solution, and there is no other alternative, then they may be dismissed. Other such interim decisions of regional labor courts indicate that it may be possible to bar employees’ entry to the workplace and ask those who refuse to get vaccinated to either work from home or spend their annual allowance of paid leave. The decisions are case-specific and are not binding precedents. — This is still an evolving issue with no clear and bright rules. |
| JAPAN | No. An Employer may not impose vaccination upon employees | Although employees in some industries (e.g. medical professions) are highly recommended to be vaccinated, employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination. |
| MALTA | No. | The law does not provide for employers to have a general right to demand their employees are to be vaccinated. |
| MEXICO | No, employers have no general right to demand their workers get vaccinated. | Employers can’t sanction employees who decide not to get vaccinated. |
| NORWAY | No, employers cannot compel employees to vaccinate. | Employers cannot compel their employees to get vaccinated nor require proof thereof. An employer may only inquire about an employee’s vaccination status if justified on the basis of specific reasons. The employer will, inter alia, have to document that inquiring about the employee’s vaccination status constitutes a necessary measure. Furthermore, the employer must consult with the employee representative prior to its inquiry. — If the employee refuses to respond to the employer’s inquiry or if the employee otherwise informs the employer that the employee is unvaccinated, the employer may be able to remove the employee from projects where the employee could come into contact with the employer’s customers. Whether this right falls under the managerial prerogative of the employer will be subject to a case-by-case assessment |
| POLAND | No. | Although employees in some industries (e.g. medical professions) are highly recommended to be vaccinated, employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination. |
| ROMANIA | Currently, employers have no legal basis in imposing vaccination upon employees. — Nevertheless, please note that we cannot rule out the possibility for a court to deem as reasonable the imposing of vaccination in certain specific situations, especially as the imposition of vaccination is an extremely debated subject at the national and European level, consequently to the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”) decision of April 2021 stipulating that mandatory vaccination of children does not infringe the provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights in Case Vavřička and Others v. the Czech Republic. | The law does not provide for a general right of employers to demand their employees to be vaccinated. |
| SINGAPORE | Employers have no general right to demand their employees be vaccinated before returning to work. | Employers have no general right to demand their their employees be vaccinated before returning to work. While strongly encouraged by the Government, vaccination remains voluntary. |
| SPAIN | No | Employers can’t sanction employees who decide not to get vaccinated, as long as the vaccination is not required by Public health laws, it is a private decision within the private sphere of the employees and related to their fundamental rights in which Employers have no power. According to the COVID-19 national vaccination strategy, developed by the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System, vaccination against the COVID-19 virus is not mandatory. Employers can’t impose the mandatory vaccination of their employees. |
| SWITZERLAND | Employers do not have a right as such to impose vaccination to their employees. However, the Federal law on Epidemics allows the Swiss Confederation, or the cantons, to impose vaccination during particular situations (such as during a pandemic) and thus make vaccination mandatory in specific sectors (such as medical staff) to protect vulnerable people (hospitals, medical institutions, etc.). Switzerland has not used this prerogative yet and refused to impose the covid pass | In the absence of such federal or cantonal obligation, employers may only require vaccination if such measure remains compatible with the principles of necessity and proportionality and if other measures (remote work, social distancing, masks, etc.) cannot achieve the same purpose in order to protect its employees’ health. Although imposing vaccination is usually regarded as disproportionate, employers may consider that they have an overriding private interest to impose vaccination, especially if the employee’s role and duties require it (e.g.: for travelling). Companies deciding to make vaccination compulsory shall also inform and consult employees when implementing such measures in relation to health, and issue corporate employee guidelines. In the event of a refusal to vaccinate, employers shall reassign tasks to employees. Termination of an employee’s contract may be possible, but could lead to indemnification of the employee if considered unlawful. Finally, employers may request new hires to be vaccinated, in particular in healthcare institutions or to protect vulnerable people. |
| TAIWAN | Employers have no general right to demand their workers get vaccinated. That said, Taiwan currently has a massive shortage of vaccines and is only now doing the highest-priority healthcare workers and elderly, and there is no expectation that employees will be vaccinated in significant numbers until late this summer. The Ministry of Labor has remained silent up to now. | Employers have no general right to demand proof of vaccination from their employees, and because the issue concerns medical care it will fall under Taiwans’ PDPA Art. 6 requirements for written consent. A self-certification form in which the employee both gives consent and confirms their status is a potential solution. |
| THE UNITED KINGDOM | No. An employer may not require an employee to be vaccinated without their consent. The UK Government is however planning to introduce legislation requiring workers in care homes to be vaccinated as a condition of their employment, subject to narrow exceptions. | The employer may in certain circumstances be able to justify requiring an employee to undertake different work or stay away from the workplace until vaccinated. The employer must take care however to avoid claims that this amounts to indirect discrimination, or a breach of the employee’s right to work in accordance with their employment contract. — Note that the English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments all have separate devolved powers in relation to setting rules for COVID risk assessments in the workplace, so it is unwise to assume that employees in each of the UK nations can be treated the same. |
Victoria, Australia.
The following changes will kick in from 11.59pm on Friday:
Outdoor gatherings will be allowed, but the gathering size will depend on your vaccination level. Fully vaccinated residents can gather in groups of five from up to two different households and unvaccinated people are limited to groups of two.
Victorian construction workers will be required to have their first Covid vaccine dose by 11.59pm September 23.
If they don’t get jabbed, then construction workers will also be banned from crossing the metropolitan-regional boundary for work.
In other words, no jabbie, no workie.
Doesn’t this imply that the police have the power to demand proof of any individual’s vaccine status if they are under suspicion of holding an Illegal Gathering?
Sounds like Australia’s unemployment rate is going to have a bit of a bump. And the chart above is out-of-date already.
Announcing today that up to five fully-vaccinated people from two different households would be allowed to gather outside from this Saturday, Premier Andrews said that cops would not be patrolling “every park” to check that everyone at a picnic had been fully jabbed.
In Sydney, where fully-vaccinated residents were given the same freedom on September 13, Premier Gladys Berejiklian has warned attendees must be able to prove their vaccination status to police.
“We are not going to have police in every park – we are not going to have police out there asking people to prove they have been vaccinated,” Mr Andrews said of his state’s approach.
"We can’t have a situation where we are going park by park, picnic by picnic. [But] that’s not an invitation to break the rules.
“There’s a degree of good faith in this. I’m asking people to do the right thing – if they do that we’ll be out of lockdown sooner.”
Vac(c)ation 
Where on earth does this “70%” figure even come from? I assume somebody has just made that up as an arbitrary target to hit? Seems like the police do now have the authority to demand your Proof Of Permission to Picnic, though.