Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

No More Vaccine mandate

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-13/supreme-court-halts-osha-rule-that-covered-80-million-workers

by
| 3197 views | | 48 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1eMbS9ww

48 replies (most recent on top)

This aged well……

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6yjl+1eMbS9ww

Not sure why everyone thinks they need to down vote every posts that said AT&T will continue with their jab policy... An email came in less than an hour ago stating exactly that, the mandate within the company continues. I can appreciate everyone's excitement on that Supreme Court win, but in reality, nothing is changing guys.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5wzo+1eMbS9ww

At&t has been approving exemptions. I have one. Not anti-vaccine. Was actually looking to make an appointment for the J&J. Then At&t published a statement saying that their policy would mirror the CDC's as far as whatever number of boosters were required to be considered fully vaccinated. Uh, no way putting myself in that position.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4ahl+1eMbS9ww

This in a response to the post stating that 85% of Covid patients in their “local hospital” were unjabbed patients. This is in direct conflict with data around the world contradicting this ridiculous statement, and as a side note anyone without at least two jabs ( maybe three by now who knows anymore) is considered unjabbed Clown world

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3fya+1eMbS9ww

Perhaps the CWA will go on strike to support no vax mandates.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2dih+1eMbS9ww

Stop trying to convince people its coercion. Just make your choice to get vaccinated or choose to work at a place without vaccine requirement. You won't be missed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ynf+1eMbS9ww

The broad definition of coercion is "the use of express or implied threats of violence or reprisal (as discharge from employment) or other intimidating behavior that puts a person in immediate fear of the consequences in order to compel that person to act against his or her will." Actual violence, threats of violence, or other acts of pressure may constitute coercion if they're used to subvert an individual's free will or consent.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2udy+1eMbS9ww

"Bunch of arm chair lawyers. They aren't making you take anything. They can make it a condition of employment though. You still have free will, so if you get the vaccine to maintain your employment, you are doing it voluntarily. You see how that works?"

How is coercion not forcing? Hey we will let you keep your job if you take this experimental jab for a virus that has 99% survival rate. Makes perfect sense.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2iaz+1eMbS9ww

"They are making you take this so they are responsible for the consequences."

Bunch of arm chair lawyers. They aren't making you take anything. They can make it a condition of employment though. You still have free will, so if you get the vaccine to maintain your employment, you are doing it voluntarily. You see how that works?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2owc+1eMbS9ww

"Just have the company sign a liability form if you receive any adverse reactions or death to the vaccine. I bet they stop them then if everyone makes them sign a liability form.

They are making you take this so they are responsible for the consequences."

AND if we had a properly functioning union, they would have printed out these liability forms and forwarded them to members and management. But, unfortunately, we have the CWA.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kxo+1eMbS9ww

You must embrace my diversity

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wml+1eMbS9ww

“Easily confused, not terribly bright, ill-informed,and belligerent”.........You just described our upper management team and CEO.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fne+1eMbS9ww

say it again, I’m confused

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1gef+1eMbS9ww

It occurs to me reading the back and forth here and on Insider as well, that the vocal anti vax crowd are, for the most part, the exact type of employee that T would benefit from being shown the door.

Easily confused, not terribly bright, ill- informed, and belligerent.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1uld+1eMbS9ww

no authority exists that can make me participate in experimental medical trials.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1fta+1eMbS9ww

Can we also stop paying insurance for anybody who’s bmi is over 30? We should include that too because they are costing insurance companies money too.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kpb+1eMbS9ww

T’s mandate has nothing to do with employee health, customer health or public health. If you believe it does you are naive on a level that should be criminal. T has never cared about anyone or anything other than it’s executives and money. This has everything to do with current and future government contracts.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1erg+1eMbS9ww

Just have the company sign a liability form if you receive any adverse reactions or death to the vaccine. I bet they stop them then if everyone makes them sign a liability form.

They are making you take this so they are responsible for the consequences.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ohu+1eMbS9ww

AT&T Vaccine Mandate will still remain in place. Employee safety is #1 priority. If you're not wanting to get vaccinated, there are plenty of employers that don't require it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1caa+1eMbS9ww

this ruling is just for government contract groups. AT&T vaccine mandate is a company policy which was not impacted by recent SC ruling. Must still be vaccinated to be an active employee.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sxl+1eMbS9ww

"Let them fire you and then lawyer up That’s when the fun begins. "
Looks like that could threaten that ATT cash flow. That is the only thing that keeps the price of that
"bankrupt" stock afloat.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1liw+1eMbS9ww

“The Supreme Court’s decision that large companies do not have to force workers to get vax...” Do not have to, doesn’t say they can’t. DO YOU THINK T WILL CHANGE THEIR POLICY? Up vote if you think they will, Down vote if you think they will keep the mandate.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cag+1eMbS9ww

The court rightly ruled against the overreach of the Executive branch. Congress is the branch of government that enacts laws, not king Biden Time. The slope is slippery. What next “emergency “ will the executive branch impose action on millions of citizens. At least 6 justices can read and understand the Constitution. Which was created to protect the people from the government!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ugz+1eMbS9ww

“There are more jabbed patients being treated in hospitals with Covid. then unjabbed”

This is what is extremely frustrating. Because it’s completely false. And I have no doubt this mouth breather believes it’s true. My spouse works in the local hospital. 85% of admitted COVID patients are not vaccinated. You can have your beliefs and I personally don’t believe you should be forced to get vaccinated, but you don’t get to just make things up and state them as fact.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1njo+1eMbS9ww

The court is tossing the hot potato back at the employers now.. the big picture here is that the government is essentially saying, they had nothing to do with your employer forcing a vaccine on you. And if down the line something negative materializes from such vaccine, then you will only be able to sue the company.. and i know im going to hear “ I've had mine for a year and im strong as a bull” talk to me in 10-15 years when the world will actually see if the vaccine was safe or not.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jas+1eMbS9ww

it's sad how few understand that the company can mandate

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jnc+1eMbS9ww

I'm with ASSet Protection and I'm taking screenshots of all you rebellious posters disagreeing with our glorious leadership's vaccine mandate. In fact, Mr Stanky knows more about vaccines then any single one of us, including me.

He DOES know more about vaccines, TV watching, media trends, and what the customers want. I mean Stankey was the inspiration for Steve Jobs before Steve Jobs picked up a soldering iron in that little garage in California.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1egi+1eMbS9ww

Sqe, read up on some state laws that have banned the jabs & required employers to honor exemptions

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zag+1eMbS9ww

AT&T needs to stick to what they do best. Loosing Billions of dollars on failed ventures. Mr Stankey, phuck you very much courtesy of the United States Supreme Court .

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zrp+1eMbS9ww

I'm with ASSet Protection and I'm taking screenshots of all you rebellious posters disagreeing with our glorious leadership's vaccine mandate. In fact, Mr Stanky knows more about vaccines then any single one of us, including me.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xog+1eMbS9ww

Your fired!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xtg+1eMbS9ww

" I mean if it’s company policy to get vax, they can fire you and there’s nothing you can do." Hey d-mb azz. I was close to getting vaccinated until company said their policy would be whatever the CDC said as far as booster after booster. Unwilling to give up my bodily autonomy and take jab after jab. I got an exemption. Sc--w you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1iuk+1eMbS9ww

Adverse reactions to the vaccine?? What about Adverse reactions to covid? Hospitals are overwhelmed with unvaccinated covid patients.
Vaccine mandates can be by employer. I think it may also end up being mandated on a state basis.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1juk+1eMbS9ww

I hope AT&T mandates it all. More money and resources spent on yet another lost cause. Over $100 billion in debt over prior decisions. Waste dwindling resources chasing another ghost.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rjy+1eMbS9ww

Let them fire you and then lawyer up That’s when the fun begins. Anyone at this point who is oblivious to all the serious and adverse reactions these jabs are causing in addition to not providing any immunity or transmission is either complicit in this scam or profiting from in in ways you’ll never realize., then there’s the rest who can’t come to grips with being duped

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1naf+1eMbS9ww

Why can’t the anti-vax crowd understand a simple concept? (That’s rhetorical, I already know the answer).

The government can’t mandate. An employer can still mandate. You can downvote this statement and all the variations of it that people have already made all you’d like, but that’s the long and short of it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cdy+1eMbS9ww

Hope ATT sticks to their g-ns and mandates vaccines. For those opposed, Bye Felicia! 👋

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dnm+1eMbS9ww

Land of the free, home of the brave. Mandate = less freedom

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ryc+1eMbS9ww

It’s the fine from the federal government that will no longer exist. That was the driving factor.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gmr+1eMbS9ww

The Supreme Court can say ‘No Mandate’ all they want. Fact is, T can implement whatever policy they want, right? I mean if it’s company policy to get vax, they can fire you and there’s nothing you can do.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sqe+1eMbS9ww

Post a reply

: