Hospitals illegally firing nurses for refusing flu vaccines - page 4
Apologies if this has been posted somewhere else. I'm using the mobile app and am still getting the hang of things. What are your thoughts? Hospitals illegally firing nurses for refusing flu vaccines in violation of state law,... Read More
- 1Jan 23, '13 by totallyfakerockgodQuote from Esme12Totally agreeing with this!I think this needs to be challenged in a court of law. You MUST take a shot, you must be thin, you may not smoke, we don't hire redheads....the list will grow. America is the land of the free and the brave....? IMHO.... It's a slippery slope we've begun to follow.
It's a vary slipper slope!
I'm a smoker who.works for a non smoking company & what I do on my time is NONE of their bussiness.
I choose not to.smoke at.work & to comply with my jobs rules regarding. But if I choose to.spend my 15 minute lunch walking around Ryde block & have a cigarette that's my choice. I just rince before I return. Simple as that.
I won't get the flu mist or shot either. I keep clean & if I get it it's my.check.that's short not my bosses. It actually makes, me very ill for 6-9 weeks. Hm...chance.a week or 2 off... Or months
- 6Jan 23, '13 by HouTx GuideJust an FYI - Tx has already passed legislation that mandates this... with increasing levels of compliance required over the next few years. So - nope, it's not optional for any healthcare facility that must be licensed by our Dept of Health. Seems odd, doesn't it that our state leadership refuses to participate in Federal health initiatives, thereby losing 100's of millions of Fed $'s based on a down & dirty fight against Federal mandates for reproductive rights --- but has no problem mandating flu vaccine?? Yep, got your situational ethics right here. (head shaking)
- 2Jan 23, '13 by olddraggerMany posters have said that as nurses we are bound by professional responsibility to take this vaccine in order to protect our patients.
OK then. How do you know that you are protected once you receive the vaccination? I am sure most realize that it is not highly effective. I believe the best percentage is around 62% effective? So if 100 Nurses receive the vaccination then on average 38 of them will not develop any immunity that would prevent them from being a carrier.
So how do you know which ones will be Ok and which ones will not?
To mandate a vaccination in which there may not be any benefit for the person ( or others around them) is just wrong.
Personally I feel that all hcws should be wearing masks while at work and be bound by professional responsibility to maintain the proper infection control protocols---but wait--can we do that?? Lol--heck no? Why? Because CMS has not required the hospitals too and it would cost hospitals a lot of money to implement this correctly.
If you want to truly protect your patients from influenza--then do so. To begin with lobby your hospital to develop better handwashing, cough, sneeze containment, restricting visitors, Dr participation, adequate staffing, and proper patient placement.
Advise them that it is not acceptable for one nurse to be caring for 3 patients with contagious illnesses and 2 patients that have compromised immune systems --at the same time!
It seems to me that this infleunza vaccination has become a miracle worker--lol
This world sure is crazy and people sure are funny.
- 6Jan 23, '13 by woohQuote from Kittypower123No. It's a PUNITIVE measure. If it was TRULY a preventative measure, then everyone not vaccinated against the strain of flu B that's going around would be wearing a mask. Because our patients are VULNERABLE. Oh, that's right, nobody is vaccinated against that strain because it wasn't included. But is everyone wearing masks? No. Because hospitals don't give a flying rat about "the vulnerable patients." They care about having to pay for people taking sick days during times of high census. Flu vax prevents some staff from getting sick and calling in. It has NOTHING to do with protecting patients and everything to do with protecting the hospital's profit margin.Since certain people, for medical reasons, cannot be vaccinated, those people must take other measures to reduce the risk of passing flu on to the patients. Requiring non-vaccinated nurses to wear masks during flu season is not a punitive measure but a preventative one.
- 1Jan 24, '13 by grpmanQuote from AQEELSMOMSo, would you expect a nurse manager to hire someone who can't bend over to tie their own shoes and asks for extra breaks to smoke?Which goes back to my previous question, why does the law not protect ones choices about their own healthcare? In the workplace specifically.
Could a hospital not then take it a step further and say, we don't hire obese people because they can't move as efficiently as fit people, we don't hire smokers because they take too many breaks, we don't hire people with a history of depression (unless they go on a pre approved list of antidepressants) because they might get sad and miss work?
- 0Jan 24, '13 by olddraggerSo its wrong to question? It's wrong to insist on evidence proven research?
IMHO nursing/employee compliance is what a lot of people and facilities count on to do whatever they want.
If you truly want to be a patient advacant ( yes people receiving the flu shots are patients!) then know all you can concerning whatever you are about to do to them.
The flu shot has a place, but the hype around it is very misleading. "Lets just comply"????????
GRPMAN---it's one thing concerning new hires--its a totally different matter concerning people that have been employed by the facility for years. For example--would it be ok to fire a nurse for gaining "too much weight", or now having to take antidepressants (for a variety of reasons). Would it be ok to fire someone if they were in a car wreck and lost the sight of one eye? No--I dont think it would --would it? So it's ok to fire someone that doesnt want to take an ineffective vaccination?
- 2Jan 24, '13 by CrunchRNI have had the flu shot 24 times. Hard to believe it is much of a threat, but I do hate to see employers becoming more and more intrusive into our non-working lives.
This whole thing would not be happening or enforceable if they not over-saturated the market with nurses. Since they achieved that they pretty much have carte-blanche (?sp) to dictate any terms they wish now.
- 3Jan 24, '13 by Julia77063Quote from gettingbsn2msnI figured the weight issue would come up. Sometimes when I'm trying to maneuver around my pt's room I wonder how would I do it if I were obese or even 30 lbs heavier. But I feel that hospitals don't support good health habits for their nurses. Like eating every 4 hours ( like we should), drinking adequate water, and getting adequate sleep.They are already looking at the weight of nurses in Texas. It is not discrimination but a way to reduce employer healthcare costs. We were discussing this the other night on our shift. We expect our weigh ins to begin soon!