Get the Jab or You're Fired

[TheAccountant]

What “freedom” are you referring to? The freedom of employees telling the business owners what the rules are? That’s the same nonexistent “freedom” the leftwing socialist unions push.

If you don’t like it, invest your time, money, effort, and risk and build your own business. Until then, shut up and do what you’re told.

I agree with most of what you write, however, the caveat is: If an employer forces his/her employees to get the vaccine, and they decide to leave instead, what will the employer do??? If over half the workforce decides they won't participate in the experiment, he'll have to let them go, right???? So, who will do the work? Especially trained techs like myself, who, while not irreplaceable, would be near impossible to fill the position.

What happens when a business decides to contract with a vendor, but then requires that the vendor's folks have the vaccine. The vendor doesn't have the manpower to do the job with the amount of vaccinated folks. The business tries again, and again, and again with different vendors, with no luck, what do they do???

Have you seen the folks entering the workforce in the last year???

Clyde

I think any time employees are leaving or you’re having difficulty finding employees you have to look at what you’re asking for (skills, qualifications, experience, etc) compared to what you’re giving (ie comp & benefits). If you’re losing people then your competitors are doing something better than you are, and you probably need to fix it before it becomes a top line problem. So if you are demanding X, Y, and Z of your employees and your competitors are only demanding X and Y, then you better be doing something ($$) to make up for the extra demands. It doesn’t matter if the extra demand is a vaccine, a certification, a degree, hours, or anything else. Retaining and incentivizing people isn’t a new problem and there’s a reason firms get paid big money to develop plans for companies.

What makes that difficult is for some of these positions you’re biggest competitor is the government that’s willing to pass out money to people to sit on their ass.

 

[kenpoprofessor]

I think any time employees are leaving or you’re having difficulty finding employees you have to look at what you’re asking for (skills, qualifications, experience, etc) compared to what you’re giving (ie comp & benefits). If you’re losing people then your competitors are doing something better than you are, and you probably need to fix it before it becomes a top line problem. So if you are demanding X, Y, and Z of your employees and your competitors are only demanding X and Y, then you better be doing something ($$) to make up for the extra demands. It doesn’t matter if the extra demand is a vaccine, a certification, a degree, hours, or anything else. Retaining and incentivizing people isn’t a new problem and there’s a reason firms get paid big money to develop plans for companies.

What makes that difficult is for some of these positions you’re biggest competitor is the government that’s willing to pass out money to people to sit on their ass.

I wasn't talking about businesses retaining employees as much as I was businesses attempting to contract with vendors. If businesses insist their vendors/contractors have the vaccine, and the vendor/contractor does not have the amount of people vaccinated to perform the tasks, what will they do??? Will the contractor lose people if they force the vaccine? How will they replace those people with vaccinated folks who can't do the job??? When the businesses can't find a contractor to perform the work because they insist on a vaccine to be on premises, what will they do????


Clyde

 

[TheAccountant]

Adding a tier doesn’t change the equation.

 

[kenpoprofessor]

Adding a tier doesn’t change the equation.

Yes, it does. If a business cannot get their contractors to perform the required work they need, the business will have to adapt to the new "environment" of non vaccinated. If they decide the "whatever upgrade" is that important, they will change their tactics to accommodate, or they will go without and possibly lose income because they didn't have the work performed.

Clyde

 

[YNOTAZ]

An obvious lack of experience in the Arizona construction industry employment and contracts over the past 10 years+ years.

 

[kenpoprofessor]

An obvious lack of experience in the Arizona construction industry employment and contracts over the past 10 years+ years.

Me, or the other guy?

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[vvalter_vvhite]

Which of the Covid vaccines have received FDA approval?

NONE

 

[338lapua]

338L, where ya been, man?

I am still here just don't the caliber of posters here most days. This site needs a enema starting with a coffee enema.

 

[338lapua]

Which of the Covid vaccines have received FDA approval?

None of them but I fear under Biden I fear they will be approved and they will try to force us all to take them or we can no longer shop. The day that announces I am out of this country for good.

 

[TheAccountant]

Adding a tier doesn’t change the equation.

Yes, it does. If a business cannot get their contractors to perform the required work they need, the business will have to adapt to the new "environment" of non vaccinated. If they decide the "whatever upgrade" is that important, they will change their tactics to accommodate, or they will go without and possibly lose income because they didn't have the work performed.

Clyde

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

 

[kenpoprofessor]

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

 

[TheAccountant]

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

You replied to me claiming it was somehow different than employees, but ok.

 

[YNOTAZ]

An obvious lack of experience in the Arizona construction industry employment and contracts over the past 10 years+ years.

Me, or the other guy?

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

I think the answer is obvious even to the casual observers. No ACCOUNTING for the lack of knowledge in the field.

 

[YNOTAZ]

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

Not the same at all.

A subcontractor has a contract that likely has an LD clause, a “prosecute work with all due diligence” clause, and an “appropriate manpower to maintain schedule” clause.

Loss of a superintendent, a crew, or key personnel because they haven’t been or refuse to be poked will not only create a financial burden that will likely close that business, it will cause an irreparable violation of the contractor’s license. If the GC submits a complaint the QP and all officers/partners of that business will not be eligible to get another contracting license in AZ.

A GC can't order subs to have their employees poked if it was not part of the initial contract. I don't know a single sub that would agree to those terms in a contract prior to starting work.

I don't know all of them but I know a damn good number of them.

 

[Cubiclerevolt]

ITT: Some cool people who know whats up, low T karens, and cali transplants that are determined to use their retarded mental gymnastics to defend their position.

 

[Cubiclerevolt]

Why isn't immunizations for ALL communicable diseases required?

Why is it this chump virus that is SO FREAKING WEAK THAT PEOPLE ARE CARRIERS AND DO NOT KNOW IF THEY HAVE IT being pushed on people?

No one asks me about my MMR or chickenpox vax proof? Why? Because anyone that has a non smoothbrain and testosterone north of 350 knows what time it is.

At no point in my agreement to work with said employer did they require any proof of my immunization details. This does not change now and they day they start, they can FOAD and they can fire me.

 

[Cubiclerevolt]

I wonder how ADOSH or OSHA would look at the employees right to refuse dangerous work?

Dangerous: Get shot with an untested drug, approved only on an emergency basis, while giving the manufacturers full immunity, is only touted to increase your odds of avoiding serious illness from 95.5% to 97% unless you are already to sick or weak to work, may only last 6 months, and a leading Yale virologist says it appears not to protect you from contracting the dreaded disease in the first place.

It just takes a too much money and time to demonstrate how idiotic this is, probably more than anyone is willing to commit.

Exactly. I'm already reaching out to lawyers regarding this getting ready to fight if push comes to shove. It's one thing even if it was FDA approved but if I end up stroking out or having neurological issues from this and my employer forced me to do so, it's now a workplace injury issue. My work is already mulling this over but they are being reserved intentionally waiting to see if they will be legally protected on forcing people to take this bullshit without being sued.

 

[oldslurrydog1]

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

Not the same at all.

A subcontractor has a contract that likely has an LD clause, a “prosecute work with all due diligence” clause, and an “appropriate manpower to maintain schedule” clause.

Loss of a superintendent, a crew, or key personnel because they haven’t been or refuse to be poked will not only create a financial burden that will likely close that business, it will cause an irreparable violation of the contractor’s license. If the GC submits a complaint the QP and all officers/partners of that business will not be eligible to get another contracting license in AZ.

A GC can't order subs to have their employees poked if it was not part of the initial contract. I don't know a single sub that would agree to those terms in a contract prior to starting work.

I don't know all of them but I know a damn good number of them.

I had this same argument with Kenpo years ago at Tony's Bday party.
Apparently his views have changed since then.

 

[TheAccountant]

Same concept applies to the business’s employees. It’s no different.

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

Not the same at all.

A subcontractor has a contract that likely has an LD clause, a “prosecute work with all due diligence” clause, and an “appropriate manpower to maintain schedule” clause.

Loss of a superintendent, a crew, or key personnel because they haven’t been or refuse to be poked will not only create a financial burden that will likely close that business, it will cause an irreparable violation of the contractor’s license. If the GC submits a complaint the QP and all officers/partners of that business will not be eligible to get another contracting license in AZ.

A GC can't order subs to have their employees poked if it was not part of the initial contract. I don't know a single sub that would agree to those terms in a contract prior to starting work.

I don't know all of them but I know a damn good number of them.

Oh, so you mean if the sub makes decisions that make it difficult or impossible to retain employees they’re top line is going to suffer? You mean if a GC makes demands and can’t find a sub to take their work at the price they’re willing to pay they’re business will suffer too? Shocking. I’ve never heard that before. :roll:

 

[YNOTAZ]

Uh, yea, I've already written that in one of the posts I made, duhhhh

Clyde

Not the same at all.

A subcontractor has a contract that likely has an LD clause, a “prosecute work with all due diligence” clause, and an “appropriate manpower to maintain schedule” clause.

Loss of a superintendent, a crew, or key personnel because they haven’t been or refuse to be poked will not only create a financial burden that will likely close that business, it will cause an irreparable violation of the contractor’s license. If the GC submits a complaint the QP and all officers/partners of that business will not be eligible to get another contracting license in AZ.

A GC can't order subs to have their employees poked if it was not part of the initial contract. I don't know a single sub that would agree to those terms in a contract prior to starting work.

I don't know all of them but I know a damn good number of them.

Oh, so you mean if the sub makes decisions that make it difficult or impossible to retain employees they’re top line is going to suffer? You mean if a GC makes demands and can’t find a sub to take their work at the price they’re willing to pay they’re business will suffer too? Shocking. I’ve never heard that before. :roll:

You're talking out of you A$$, you don't train construction workers over night and you know nothing about construction contracts.

Why don't you just quit and cut your losses before everyone discovers you name is Biden.