tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1685903630161577363.post1658997809725051737..comments2024-03-28T01:58:21.637-04:00Comments on Screw You Guys, I'm Going Home: No Flu Shot? That's a FiringUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1685903630161577363.post-75913185488146017622015-11-13T20:06:47.582-05:002015-11-13T20:06:47.582-05:00So what about the "health" of the employ...So what about the "health" of the employee?? ..are the patients the only ones who have "rights"? ..and what about the patients who come in with the flu? and haven't gotten the flu shot..do we mandate that all our patients have the flu shot? <br />The flu shot itself, is just a gamble, and an extremely poor one at that...there are over a thousand strains of flu, and the shot only protects against about 7 to 10 strains..so those really aren't good odds in my book. And there are a lot of other ingredients in the flu shot that are toxic and dangerous.. And any time that something is so controversial, people should have a right to decide if they want to take the chance that comes with getting it. Many people have been adversely affected by the shot. "Forced healthcare" has no place in a "free" society! I can see people who have an extenuating medical condition, such as asthma, HIV, cancer, etc getting the flu shot to prevent severe complications of illness, but slamming it on every healthy person who has an active, functioning immune system is ridiculous and unnecessary.. If you're sick, be smart and stay home..protect yourself by avoiding people who are coughing, washing your hands, etc..<br />Do you know how many people the flu actually kills a year? And what about the effects of the flu shot itself? Do you know how many people suffer from adverse reactions to the flu shot?? ..and oh yea, that's right, you can't sue the makers of the flu shot if you are adversely affected because they are protected by the federal government...imagine that!Richellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02467271148637043639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1685903630161577363.post-46655757034443841702012-12-05T21:25:51.683-05:002012-12-05T21:25:51.683-05:00Getting fired for not getting a flu shot sounds ab...Getting fired for not getting a flu shot sounds absurd to me. Especially before Thanksgiving. Whether get a flu shot or not is personal freedom. Can't believe there is a growing trend in the healthcare industry to require an employee to insert something unwillingly into their bloodstream. The world is crazy. Thanks for your info. See <a href="http://www.easybusinessposters.com/" rel="nofollow">Labor law compliance posters</a> for more information on jobs.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07487631902741830317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1685903630161577363.post-46664637911413014362012-11-30T22:48:13.720-05:002012-11-30T22:48:13.720-05:00I agree with iponder, that the policy should be be...I agree with iponder, that the policy should be better defined. Certainly with some people in healtcare - secretaries, technicians, janitors and the like - the actual possiblity of transmission of flu to patients is low. For these people sick time that is generous and easy to use mostly cuts off transmission from them to others. Nurses and doctors in fields where they may transmit the flu to vulnerable people? Unless they have a health problem that precludes getting a flu shot they should be required to get it. Why? FLU KILLS. It might only be the very old, very young, or the very sick, or the pregnant but it still kills. With the way sue-happy people are going, it won't be long (if it hasn't happened already) before someone sues for getting the flu. I bet a lot of companies are weighing future ligation against manadates like this. Other considerations - comparing someone's life against not getting any vaccine? As far as rights go, someone not dying trumps not getting a shot once a year. I'm not saying a blanket policy like this is right, but for some people working in healthcare, this is the best policy in regards to the health of the patients. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1685903630161577363.post-77772184917657049752012-11-30T18:07:32.829-05:002012-11-30T18:07:32.829-05:00I think there are some industries that require a g...I think there are some industries that require a greater level of healthcare protection than others - and the medical field is one of them. (Or working as a plumber or rubbish removal person!)<br /><br />There is to me a raft of difference between a flu shot and a Hep B or MMR immunisation. Influenza is an endemic illness that is short duration, rarely life threatening, and as a constantly changing virus needs to be redone year upon year. Other diseases we immunise against are in a different category, and if you were working in a role as a midwife for example I think it's reasonable to expect you to be immune to pertussis (whooping cough), rubella and Hep B. Front line medical field staff are exposed to so many illnesses, and many have infectious incubation periods where the risk to other already ill patients needs to be considered.<br /><br />150 staff suggests to me though that it was far more than frontline medical staff. <br /><br />As a person who reacts quite negatively to immunisations I feel people should have the right to refuse if they are not placing other people at risk - but then they need to consider whether they want to keep working in an industry where they will be exposed to many illnesses, where they risk transferring them to patients with high risk factors, and whether they can afford all the potential time off sick.<br /><br />I think the employer has got it wrong - I think it's a frontline staff requirement (unless covered by discrimination legislation), but back of house or non-public staff should probably be allowed to choose.iPONDERhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04442473757535135307noreply@blogger.com