"An employer does have a right to set the terms of employment " ?

[Dachsie]

Dachsie comments: What if the term(s) that an employer sets is unlawful in and of itself, that is, it is a term that is against established laws. How can an employer mandate any medical treatment or procedure. This just seems so fundamentally unlawful and absurd and outrageous to me. Everything connected with this "virus" and "vaccine" seems related to lying, bribery, extorition and blackmail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLwcwwgmuyE


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLwcwwgmuyE

Workers fired over vaccine status likely ineligible for unemployment aid
12,862 views
Oct 14, 2021

CBS News

Workers who have been terminated because they are unvaccinated likely won't qualify for unemployment benefits. State labor departments are rejecting applications as more companies shift toward vaccine mandates. CBS News MoneyWatch reporter Megan Cerullo wrote about this in a recent article. She joins CBSN's Lana Zak to explain the qualification process.

[ziero0]

I always thought it unnecessary (and unhealthy) to hang around where I was not wanted.

As a fact I seemed to get more jobs if I left my last employer laughing (him that is).

Besides you really don't want to hang around a bunch of immunity-deprived degenerates.

[Dachsie]

I still say it is important to ask for a letter of dismissal and that the letter sets out the reason for dismissal. I still say, at least in my state, that the fact of whether you were fired or whether you quit is crucial in deciding the granting of state unemployment compensation benefits.

The REASON for your dismissal is a medical/health STATUS you are judged to possess, that is, you possess the "unvaccinated status."

When you are offered a form to sign your name on stating You Will accept what is being offered on the written agreement or You Will Not accept being offered, you should not sign at all, not You Will and not You Will Not. The reason you should have nothing do with that document is that what you are being offered is fraudulent. What in fact you are being offered is a medical procedure on and injection to your body, and the laboratory TEST itself is also a medical procedure on your body. However, the wording on the form is a deception and a fraud. They are not stating clearly what it is you are being offered, offered to accept or reject, in writing.

None of this has anything to do with your work performance nor with your breaking of any of the company rules as set out in the brochure you were given, and the forms you signed, when you accepted employment with the company.

If the company refuses to fire you in the legal way, you are in a much more tenuous or vulnerable position as far as being granted or denied your state's unemployment compensation. There may be othe reasons that work against you by this failure to be fired in the correct legal way.

In a sense, you have been paying into your Federal Unemployment Tax Act FUTA even though this federal tax is only on the employER because your prospective employer bases the calculation that determines your rate of pay for your job and job/pay classification taking into account what the company has to cover out of their pocket to have you as employee, and of course they pass that FUTA cost on to you and take it out of your pay.


There are several lawsuits over these "vaccine mandates" but what this CBS media video and article imply is that federal vaccine mandates' legality and lawsuit outcomes has nothing to do with an employer's right to set whatever terms of employment they want. That to me is WRONG. They do not have the LEGAL RIGHT to set whatever terms of employment they want.

[osoab]

They do have the right to walk away. Woe to any that did not keep themselves flexible.

[ziero0]

OSHA is required for employment. If you turn it down you will be discharged. The reason given will not state this as a cause for discharge though.

[woodman]

They do have the right to walk away. Woe to any that did not keep themselves flexible.
Agreed. Employment is an agreement between the employee and employer. This takes two to have an agreement. Both parties should be free to end that agreement at any time and for any reason, unless an agreement was in place that one or both parties would maintain said employment for specified time, etc. If a binding agreement is broken then the injured party should be able to reap monetary damages. If an employee had done nothing wrong and is wrongly fired they should be elligable for unemployment benefits. To my way of thinking, if a company cannot fire an employee for any reason, and an employee cannot leave the job for any reason whatsoever, that is the definition of slavery.

[Dachsie]

Of course "the right to walk away" goes without saying. That's not what I'm talking about here.

[woodman]

^^I knew that Dachsie. You are very freedom minded and I think we all appreciate that around here.

[ziero0]

An employee is a fiduciary in a trust relationship. Check Hutchens v Maxicenters. That explains it all.

https://casetext.com/case/hutchens-v-maxicenters-usa