Not allowed to work unless you have had the vaccine?!

[Sophia777]

Hi, I’m a first time poster and would like peoples views so I can gain an understanding.
Recently, a nursing home chain have stated that no staff member will be able to work if they have not had the vaccine. The reason they say, is because people who have not been vaccinated will put others at risk.
I understand that the vaccine ONLY protects yourself - research shows that after the Pfizer vaccine you can still transmit the virus. Research regarding Oxford says it MAY lessen transmission by 23% - but as we all know, Africa want to send back 1 million doses because it does not work on the South African variant.
So am I missing something here?? Why is it so important for HC workers to be vaccinated if it can still be transmitted? It’s not like you will be passing on a less fatal strain by having the vaccine.
If it stopped transmission it would sort out the whole world, build herd immunity and all the rest. But as it stands we can all still be hosts because we can still transmit.
Can we still transmit when our bodies have produced natural antibodies from contracting COVID-19?
Help me fill in the blanks!

It is not currently known to what extent the vaccines completely prevent infection, or the extent to which asymptomatic infection after vaccination results in transmission. However it’s likely that the vaccines do prevent infection in some cases, and that people with asymptomatic infection are less infectious than those with respiratory symptoms.

Therefore vaccination is most likely to reduce the likelihood of an individual having and/or transmitting the virus, thus giving some protection to the people with whom the individual comes into contact.

The efficacy against the SA variant is an separate issue.
a) at the moment it’s the Kent variant we need to worry about most. That’s the one you’re most likely to get
b) AZ are already working on a tweaked vaccine against the SA variant.

because if the staff get covid, they will be off sick/ isolating and there won't be enough people to actually look after the patients maybe?

There are some unknowns at the moment but isn't it best to at least try to reduce risk as much as possible by having the vaccine. I fail to understand how you can be a carer of the most vulnerable to this disease and not want to do everything possible to prevent those you care for from getting sick. It just doesn't seem in the spirit of caring to me.

I just now feel incredibly sorry for ds1

He graduated in 2020 obviously when job hunting was very difficult, we all agreed that it would make sense to do a masters and get a job this year

And now they are talking about no jab no job....so he’s not going to be able to get a sodding job for months...if he’s lucky!

Ultimately the more people who are vaccinated, the better protected we will all be. The transmission levels will be at an acceptable level to go our normal life. Those who cannot have the vaccine are therefore protected. We have to stop seeing this as a personal level thing and start acting for the greater good so we can live freely again! It’s how all vaccines work.

We're still learning a lot about how vaccines will benefit us.

If we can't get a reasonable level of control or variants take over before vaccines are tweaked, I do wonder if there's a point under health and safety at work where vaccination would be considered. Where I work they are very hot on health and safety for us, our colleagues and customers - personally in the short-term I'll feel less safe around those who haven't been vaccinated and wonder if there's an argument for wanting to be protected at work.

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

I just now feel incredibly sorry for ds1

He graduated in 2020 obviously when job hunting was very difficult, we all agreed that it would make sense to do a masters and get a job this year

And now they are talking about no jab no job....so he’s not going to be able to get a sodding job for months...if he’s lucky!

OP is talking about a nursing home. I would imagine that the successful applicant would be offered a jab if they had not had one because health and care workers are right at the top of the priority list.

Thanks for your comments I understand that being the long term plan.
What concerns me is the 10% on which the vaccine is not effective and the other % which are unable to have the vaccine for whatever reason, will be put at risk due to the vaccinated carriers - who will be passing the virus whilst asymptomatic. If a person has not received the vaccine they will more likely have symptoms, therefore getting tested and isolating, preventing the spread and therefore safeguarding the vulnerable.

Calm my tits now?!
I’m just interested in peoples views. Of which you have contributed nothing.

I understand that the vaccine ONLY protects yourself

What concerns me is the 10% on which the vaccine is not effective and the other % which are unable to have the vaccine for whatever reason, will be put at risk due to the vaccinated carriers - who will be passing the virus whilst asymptomatic. If a person has not received the vaccine they will more likely have symptoms, therefore getting tested and isolating, preventing the spread and therefore safeguarding the vulnerable.

OP, what is the basis for your saying the above.

You are trying too hard to justify not getting the jab and making things up.

Well if 10% of those who get vaccine don't have the intended protection the less people who have a vaccine the more than that 10% get ill?

For example if 100 people are vaccinated 90% are protected well.

If out if 100 people only 5 get vaccinated that is 55% without adequate protection.

Should have said 50/100 people!

The likelihood (not the certainty, but the likelihood) all along was that the vaccine would have a meaningful impact on transmission. That's what most vaccines - polio excepted, for specific biological reasons - tend to do. There's emerging evidence that it does, indeed, impact on transmission, although the extent of that is currently a known unknown.

It's normal in the NHS at least to need occupational health clearance for any new job. That normally involves establishing you have the relevant vaccines and, if need be, have been blood tested to show immunity. For example, having had the Hepatitis B vaccine is mandatory for me to do my job role. This is both to protect patients and to protect staff.

I absolutely can see the situation - in a few months or a year's time, depending on availability - where the covid vaccine goes on the list of those you have to have in order to get occupational health clearance. It's also possible it may be treated like the flu vaccine: strongly encouraged, made easy to access, but not mandatory. I suspect it will depend on public opinion, and on what we learn about vaccine impact on transmission.

Dont want the Job Centre to force you into a nursing home job? Dont have it.

I understand that the vaccine ONLY protects yourself - research shows that after the Pfizer vaccine you can still transmit the virus.

But probably less than people who are unvaccinated: see here

Research regarding Oxford says it MAY lessen transmission by 23%

I think you mean 67%

but as we all know, Africa want to send back 1 million doses because it does not work on the South African variant.

And lots of people think they’re being ridiculous. Their very small study showed the AZ vaccine was not very effective against mild disease, but everyone in the sample was young and healthy. Prof Sarah Gilbert has said she is confident it will still protect well against serious disease and death. And in any case 1) there are currently very few cases of the SA variant in the UK, it is likely that the Kent variant will out compete it; 2) they are already working on a tweaked version, which should be ready by the Autumn.

Whether it is legal or ethical for employers to demand vaccination of their staff is a convoluted matter. But the things you’ve said above are not reasons to not be vaccinated.

You are looking for a care home for someone you love.

Would you choose one where staff are vaccinated or one where they aren't? I think the care home sector are aware that more people would choose former.

What worries me is that I can see (more of) a divide in future between privately funded homes, who will need to assure families their staff are vaccinated to maintain their business and the cheaper council funded resident's homes who will not have the same business pressures.

If you can pay you get vaccinated carers, if the state are paying possibly not.

I don't think they can legally say this.. It is against nuremberg code. The vaccine are still in trial phase. I would happily point this out to them if they were my employer...

@MercyBooth

Dont want the Job Centre to force you into a nursing home job? Dont have it.

Will jobseekers be facing sanctions if they don't have the jab? I fear that is a slippery slope e could end up on.

@XenoBitch I can see that happening.

Some jobs require certain vaccines, I had loads when I applied for my nurse training because my parents didn't get me vaccinated. If I'd refused I wouldn't have got a place on the course or a job in the hospital. This is just another one on the list.

"If you can pay you get vaccinated carers, if the state are paying possibly not"

We are all in this together everyone. Keep wearing those masks to protect your "betters" Oh but if you havent got the money to pay for your nursing home we arent all in this together after all.

Indeed Mercy, and while it has always been thus, this is an especially cruel example.

But it's only poor people isn't it?

@boogiebogie

I don't think they can legally say this.. It is against nuremberg code. The vaccine are still in trial phase. I would happily point this out to them if they were my employer...

People receiving the vaccine now under the rollout are not subjects in "Permissible Medical Experiments" and so the Nuremberg Code does not apply. It also is not part of UK law.

You are clearly at liberty to point out whatever you like to your employer, but all you'll achieve with this particular line of argument is to make yourself look daft.

I'd suggest that if you wanted to argue against employers requiring Covid vaccination a better strategy would be discrimination (if the reluctance is due to a protected characteristic), constructive dismissal (for someone already in post), or an infringement of the individual's right to privacy. You're unlikely to be met with a mix of laughter and headshaking that way.

And.......bang on cue.

twitter.com/kathiebennett/status/1362135160372793346?s=20