Employer disadvantaging and threatening staff who haven’t had the vaccine

[MrsFCastle]

My partner works in health and social care. He isn’t an anti vaxxer. Just feels it’s too soon. His employer is furious and is threatening to stop offering shifts if they don’t get it. I’m genuinely concerned about his job security. Can they do this? Helpful replies only please. This isn’t a thread about anti/pro vax.

My ma is in a care home and I wouldn’t be happy for her to be cared for by someone who refuses the vaccine and puts her at risk. If he won’t have it he needs to work in another industry...there will be plenty of others to take his place when furlough ends.

@Calledyoulastnightfromglasgow

You do realise that a significant minority of doctors have refused the vaccine don’t you?

Could you post a link to this?

He needs to have a proper discussion with his employer about what exactly his reasons are for not wanting the vaccine. This needs to be a lot more than the very vague reasoning ‘it’s too soon’ that has been offered on here.

@Downthefarm

The Guardian says this morning that Barchester care homes have taken legal advice and that requiring vaccine may come under the "some other compelling reason" to dismiss or refuse shifts. I think employers would win this actually, on that basis.

95% people apparently support vaccine passports, according to a Yougov poll.

I think this is possible too, I can see why any setting with vulnerable people, from young adults to the elderly, would wish to have only vaccinated staff in client facing roles, and I could see why clients would demand this, along with other precautions.

I can also see it in other workplaces where vulnerable people may work.

It’s about the rights of the individual v the rights of those working there. As the individual is exercising choice, and not refusing based on doctors advice, then it is logical to think thr consequneces of that decision should be theirs and not everyone they come into contact with.

It’s difficult, but I could see employers winning this. But I think it will take some time to formally land. I can also see the government passing a law that says all staff who come into contact with the vulnerable have to be vaccinated.

Whilst completely illegal to do, there are employers out there who will do everything possible to force employees to leave whilst not doing anything that would stand up in a tribunal

I suspect this may well be the reality of it. The position's not yet clear around compulsory Covid jabs, but there are plenty of other reasons for dismissal that can be found - and in the case of someone careless about the safety needs of patients it probably won't be hard to find them

And this is from someone who wouldn't have had the jab straight away even if I could ... but I'll have it now, with 16 million (?) vaccinated and so few severe side effects reported

I wouldn’t have thought they could fire him, as it would be discrimination on medical grounds.

The exception being if there’s some kind of clause in his employment contract that could be interpreted to mean he has to have it - a health & safety clause or ‘reasonable requirements of the employer’ or something.

@lightand

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/24/nhs-covid-app-prove-vaccinated-status-access-venues-pubs-in-england?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

Thank you. I dont read that as 95% necessarily at all, but "a vast majority". But whatever. [shrugs]

@Bluntness100 uptake in my NHS trust (low thousands of clinicians) is currently just under 80%. We get a weekly update newsletter and the figure is in there, so I'm afraid I can't post a link.

For everyone who has said you would not allow an unvaccinated clinician to treat you/a family member, you would not know. In the same way, you would not know:

*if the clinician is HIV positive
*if the clinician is Hepatitis B positive
*if the clinician has significant mental health issues
*if the clinician has a drug or alcohol problem.

Healthcare workers are entitled to privacy, just as everyone else is, and patients/clients will not be told information about their medical history. That includes vaccine status.

Occupational health will know. Their regulator, if in a regulated profession, will be informed if there is a risk. The individual may be subject to required blood tests/hair sample tests/regular medical reviews or whatever, to ensure that they remain safe to practice.

But you as the patient will have no idea.

Please ask him to ring ACAS. They will be able to give guidance.

Your choice/his choice.
No vaccine=no job.
Simple

If his reluctance to vaccinate is putting people he cares for at risk, then can’t see how that wouldn’t effect his job....am I missing something?

This is going to be an interesting legal dilema . Pimlico plumbers have insisted all NEW employees have had the vaccine . Their argument is owing a duty of care because their employees go into houses of the public. They are also looking at the contracts of existing staff .

You can understand why .

Charlie Plimlico is the Michael Ryanair O’Leary of the plumbing world . Whether he follows it through or not it’s all good publicity and some potential customers in a few months will have it in the back of their mind that all their plumbers are vaccinated and ring them.

Theoldwrinkley, Possibly that simple in the case of OP's partner if he's zero hours contract but it's not going to be that simple in numerous other settings. Firstly the law isn't that clear cut and secondly most settings can't afford to risk alienating/ losing a third of their staff.

This idea that there's plenty of replacement staff out there is puzzling to me. Have you seen the average pay of care staff?

I think things will improve gradually anyway as more data on safety filters through but for a quicker fix, the best carrot in my view will be if airlines insist on vaccination. The vast majority will be persuaded then.

Healthcare workers are entitled to privacy, just as everyone else is, and patients/clients will not be told information about their medical history. That includes vaccine status

This is true, but with the panic that's been encouraged over Covid and the publicity this issues's getting, I worry that there'll be ugly scenes with some refusing any care from black and asian staff on the assumption they've not been jabbed

Which would help precisely nobody

His body, his choice. I’d definitely be speaking to someone higher and ask bluntly if he is going to lose his job over this? Also if he is working with vulnerable people surely these have had the vaccine and the risk is massively reduced? Otherwise what’s the point in having it...

Also if he is working with vulnerable people surely these have had the vaccine and the risk is massively reduced? Otherwise what’s the point in having it...

There will be people who can’t have it for medical reasons

@LunarCatAndDaffodils

Given what happened in care homes when residents with Covid where sent back, I can see why any organisation in that area would be cautious.

For a couple of reasons:

1. Don’t want clients to get Covid and possibly die
2. In the event of 1 don’t want to be sued for negligence or similar.

In a free society you get freedom of choice, not freedom from the consequences of those choices.

1. There is no evidence to show that having the vaccine will prevent you catching the virus and passing it on.

1. Sued for negligence? Shame it doesn't apply to the pharma's too. There is no legal comeback if someone gets a reaction to the vax.

Another point of view. Employers have a duty of care ( under health & safety etc) to all look after all their employees.
If vaccinated staff don’t feel safe working alongside non vaccinated staff , and were all being told to return to work only if it’s safe to do so. The employers duty of care , surely has to be to the vaccinated staff ?
An employer is liable, if they were to knowingly make staff use unsafe equipment / unsafe working environment etc and not protect their safety .
Therefore if you choose not to be vaccinated, it’s down to the employer to say not work here as the obligation is to provide a safe environment to all their staff , not one staff members freedom of choice.

Haven't rtft however if this hasn't already been stated my networked employment barrister's view is that this could be a defendable position for the employer ( ie to dismiss for not having jab) if the organisation can demonstrate the need outweighs the harm - eg by significantly reducing the risk of infection. This would likely only be arguable in frontline vulnerable care roles and subject to the circumstances, attempts to redeploy away from frontline for example.

So possibly they could terminate him if the role is as above - and he could lodge an ET claim and be a test case

He needs to get the jab and get the card proof. Or no where will employ him by Xmas I'm convinced.

Jeeperscreepers69
Where are care homes going to get all these new staff in order to lay off the experienced ones?

I really have an issue about people being told what they have to do with their bodies. In my view it is no acceptable at all. Do care workers get threatened if they don’t have the flu jab every year? If not why is this different?

@Reinventinganna So your advice is to join a union ASAP. Why?
So he can evade responsibility to the wider the community of which he is a part?
Are Unions still the natural homes for The Selfish?