So how about you give your answer and the reasons for it, rather than just coyly hinting that there are good people with both possible opinions?
MY answer?
“It depends.”
There are umpteen different variables–staffing levels; the type of work the company does; the role of the person in question; how difficult it might be to replace that person; the opinion of the owner/CEO regarding the vaccine; the opinion of the owner/CEO regarding how much control is appropriate; whether the company wishes to take a position that might prove controversial; relative risks of various kinds and how they are perceived; how those risks might change over time; and so on and so forth at great length.
Stanford’s medical staff will all be unionized. So some acceptable reason for discipline would have to be articulated and refusing to get a voluntary vaccine would generally not be on that list. Employers could make it a mandatory requirement for employment, but many consider that a nuclear option for a variety of reasons including the political.
So for example my unionized employer made refusing to wear a mask at the workplace (with reasonable situational accommodation) a gross violation of workplace rules would could mean instant termination, bypassing progressive discipline entirely. But despite being very serious about COVID-19, they haven’t taken the step of requiring a vaccine. Rather they have just very strongly encouraged it.
Not sure if this is a Covidiot thing, an attempt at humor, or what. On a store’s entry door I saw a sign yesterday that said in bold letters:
**IF YOU ARE COMPLETELY VACCINATED YOU MUST NOT WEAR A MASK WHEN ENTERING THIS BUILDING
IF YOU ARE NOT COMPLETELY VACCINATED IT IS SUGGESTED BUT NOT REQUIRED THAT YOU WEAR A MASK WHEN ENTERING THIS BUILDING**
Ditto in my largely unionized industry.
Requiring vax is seen as a declaraton of war against half the employees and all the unions. So instead we get spiffs for vaxxing. Which I was gonna do anyhow, spiff or no.
TIL that a “spiff” is a bonus or reward. I initially read it as “spliff” and was 
shocked at how edgy things have become.
What is a “spiff”, please?
A perk, a little something extra, lagniappe, etc.
“Spiff” seems to come from the world of commission sales where it’s an extra reward for extra results beyond the basic compensation package.
If management gives the high-selling salesman of the month a special parking place for the next month or dinner for 2 at Chez Snootay or whatever, that’s the archetypical spiff.
In our case it’s an extra day of vacation to be taken next year. Plus some extra points in our bogus internal “Thank your co-workers!1!” recognition program that all but a few management stooges ignore.
If we get to the point where my employer is handing out spliffs, you’ll know we’ve gone all the way through Alice’s Looking Glass into Bizarro World.
That’s what I was thinking!
I was going to say …
A fried is getting threats and being told people hope she’s damned to hell after posting a note on social media that unvaccinated people should wear a mask in her store (which accords with her governor’s directive).
Ugh, people are like, the worst.
My gf wouldn’t believe me when I told her what the sign said, so I stopped this morning to get a picture and it read the way it should have. I felt like I must have dreamed the other sign.
So I went in and mentioned it to the cashier. Yesterday’s sign was a joke made by the manager who thought maybe it would create a furor and go viral. Turns out I was the only person to mention it.
And now we know …
The rest of the story …
Good day.
My employer is a monstrously large law firm (~2,500 lawyers). Naturally, they don’t require vaccination to work in the office. But they have, unsurprisingly, found ways to “encourage” employees to get vaccinated. And you can’t get through the process of booking an office or a desk without submitting proof of vaccination.
So vaccination is not required. But, somehow, the process for coming in to the office gets stalled if you can’t submit proof of vaccination.
Why the
? Sounds like a reasonable system to me.
It sounds weasely to me.
If the firm wants to require vaccination as a condition for returning to the office (or even for employment), I’m just fine with that.
But to say they don’t require vaccination, but then to make it some back-door, deniable way of doing just that, is bullshit.
Yeah, me too. I think places ought to be requiring it to return to the office. Anyone who can’t get vaccinated for health reasons can be accommodated by letting them continue to work from home, if that’s feasible.
A lot of people seem to think that it wouldn’t be legal to require it, but I’ve not seen anything to convince me of that, and the EEOC has info up saying it can be legal.
ETA:. Hmm. I don’t know. I guess it depends on what the weasely system is.
I required my employees to be vaccinated. My explanation was that I didn’t want to be around them if they weren’t, and there was no pushback.
I have (had) one part time person who was offered return to work but said she wanted paid under the table (I think so she could continue collecting UC). I told her I couldn’t do that, I’m not even sure how I’d do that.
The UC people sent me my monthly (?) questionnaire which asked if the part time woman had turned down return to work and I answered correctly/honestly. She is pissed, apparently I should have lied.