Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

Supreme Court Blocks Biden Vaccine Rules for Private Employers, Allows Them for Healthcare Workers

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked the Biden administration’s Covid-19 vaccine-or-testing rules for large private employers, upending the government’s most aggressive effort to combat the pandemic in the workplace.

The high court, however, did give the administration more latitude in the healthcare industry, allowing it to impose a vaccine mandate for more than 10 million healthcare workers whose facilities participate in Medicare and Medicaid, a holding that leaves one part of the president’s Covid-19 playbook in place.

The private-employer requirements, for businesses with 100 or more employees, would have applied to an estimated 84 million workers. The court’s conservative majority, in an unsigned opinion, said the Biden administration likely didn’t have the unilateral power to impose a mandate that employers ensure their workers were vaccinated or tested every week for Covid-19. Three liberal justices dissented.

In allowing the vaccine mandate for healthcare workers, conservatives Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberals to form a 5-4 majority, allowing that requirement to take effect nationwide.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued the private-employer rules in November. Several parts of the regulations, including a requirement for mask-wearing in the workplace by unvaccinated individuals, were set to take effect this week, though the testing requirements weren’t scheduled to be enforced until next month.

“Today’s ruling protects our individual rights and states’ rights to pursue the solutions that work best for their citizens,” said Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, who led a coalition of Republican-leaning states that challenged the OSHA rule.

The White House didn’t immediately comment on the decision.

The vaccination mandate for healthcare workers, which doesn’t include a testing alternative, was issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which said facilities that accept money from those programs must comply. Because of conflicting lower court rulings, that mandate had been in effect in only half the states.

The court’s actions come as Covid-19 has been spreading at record rates in the U.S. Republican-led states and business groups sued to block the federal requirements, arguing the Biden administration was engaged in unlawful overreach that wasn’t rendered permissible by the public-health crisis.

Technically, the Supreme Court wasn’t considering the full merits of the administration’s mandates. Instead, the justices heard the cases on an emergency basis to decide whether the regulations could go into effect right now while more detailed litigation continued in the lower courts.

A conservative high court skeptical of sweeping federal power also blocked the administration last August from continuing with a ban on evictions during the pandemic.

The court has been more accepting of Covid-19 mitigation measures adopted at the state and local levels, including mandates requiring healthcare workers and college students to be vaccinated.

by
| 1595 views | | 14 replies (last January 15, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1eM2SQHf

14 replies (most recent on top)

even in the text of the article OP posted - it says that one of the litigants acknowledges that this can be mandated at the state or local level. The question SCOTUS ruled on was not whether vaccine mandates are legal or not, but whether OSHA had the authority at a national level, and whether it could be implemented as an "emergency" measure without full litigation process.

NYC already has a private employer vaccine mandate and it has gone into effect. Unlike the OSHA mandate, the issuing body in NYC does have the authority. Expect to see more and more like that.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2wox+1eM2SQHf

Daily reminder: If vaccines didn't work, trolls wouldn't be here arguing against them.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1itj+1eM2SQHf

@whd I expected you to go for the lowest hanging fruit.

Good job. You haven't negated the argument.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rqd+1eM2SQHf

You can sue all you want but that doesn’t change the fact that Wells is proceeding despite what any right wing stacked court rules.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qev+1eM2SQHf

@ock+1eM2SQHf

Stop with the easily debunked hyperbole. They can fire you "at any time for any reason"? Really? Can they fire you for being black? Sure, they could, if they want a zillion $ lawsuit. So no, they can't just do whatever they want.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @whd+1eM2SQHf

"this could impact layoffs"

No, it can't. If there were a mandate, and you breached company policy, you would not be laid off. You would be fired for just cause.

This entire thread is spam.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kqt+1eM2SQHf

@ozd+1eM2SQHf - actually it's not. There are identified side affects that have been linked to the vaccine for some patients. It's much more likely to be proven than not.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ilg+1eM2SQHf

This will allow employees who are required to get a vax or be fired to sue their employer. Particularly, in the case where there are damages, employers can be on the hook. They can no longer hide behind the mandate.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lje+1eM2SQHf

"allow employees to sue their employers should they receive the vaccine out of an employment mandate and have an adverse reaction to it"

As difficult to prove as trying to prove you got COVID at work.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ozd+1eM2SQHf

Those lawsuits against employers haven't gone anywhere. They can terminate you for any cause, at any time.

Technically all the SCOTUS did was make federal contractor work MAGA friendlier.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ock+1eM2SQHf

While it does not preclude a business from mandating the "vaccine", the lack of the government mandate would allow employees to sue their employers should they receive the vaccine out of an employment mandate and have an adverse reaction to it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jll+1eM2SQHf

@bcc+1eM2SQHf this could impact layoffs

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @thc+1eM2SQHf

Doesn't mean businesses cannot still require it as a condition of employment. Just means the government cannot mandate it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ajx+1eM2SQHf

More off-topic spam flushing the value of this site for Wells employees straight down the toilet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bcc+1eM2SQHf

Post a reply

: