Nurse: 'I was fired for refusing flu shot' - Page 4

Register Today!
  1. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from eriksoln
    NOT THAT I CONDONE/RECOMMEND/LIKE false documentation but, when it comes to my rights, eh..........to heck with the rest of em.

    At a hospital near me, they started to try the same iron fisted approach the OP and some others are talking about. IDK why, but they seemed to have an awful lot of nurses who didn't want to. None of them did either, and they did not lose their jobs. Its this simple:

    Go to an immunization clinic (Drug store like Ekerd, one of the many that set up shop in Wal-Mart or other retailers), pay for the shot, get your paperwork, then turn it down. The people working there know what is up, will even offer a refund half the time, but almost never ask for the paperwork back.

    At the hospital near me that was feeling its oats about making people get the shot, they ended up changing gears and taking a more "We strongly suggest getting the flu shot" attitude. Turns out too many people were so turned off by their iron fist approach, everyone called their bluff and said "No". Too many in fact. Still, the people who really didn't want it that feared for their job simply went to a clinic and paid for it but.........well...............
    Apparently you DO condone and even recommend false documentation as long as you see it as protecting your "rights". How is that not fraud? I cannot imagine that this is legal and therefore I certainly hope that no one takes your advice.
    Laidback Al and CuriousMe like this.
  2. Jan 8, '11 by
    The Virginia case is the only one I have found that reached any conclusion. It is extraneous to our argument here, though, in that only nurses who have a legally binding union contract are exempt. That is obvious that anyone with a contract could not have the new policy enforced upon them in any field. However, if it isn't implemented in the next contract, the employer need not offer them the same contract again.

    On another line of thinking, who is saying the only reason for the flu shot is to protect patients? IMO, health care facilities are places where people are more likely to come in contact with various flu strains. Would requiring a flu shot for nurses not also be a way of trying to maintain productivity of the nursing staff?
  3. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from Grey Lady
    Apparently you DO condone and even recommend false documentation as long as you see it as protecting your "rights". How is that not fraud? I cannot imagine that this is legal and therefore I certainly hope that no one takes your advice.
    Agreed. I'd far rather see people standing up for the right to bodily integrity than "play along" with a facade and charade. There are legitimate reasons that all states have some form of "opt-out" for vaccinations.

    Where does it stop? If the government (or our employers) can mandate that substances be injected into our bodies whether we want them or not, where does it stop?

    I have seven children. I know plenty of people who think that it should be within the rights of the government to violate my bodily integrity by mandating that I be forced to accept sterilization or chemical birth control "for the good of the world, which is so over-populated". There are other governments in this world who do just that, along with forced abortions.

    While at this time, this may seem a stretch in the U.S., once we open the door to say that the government or our employers or so on have the right to violate our bodily integrity "for the greater good".... we are opening the door to that type of tyranny.
  4. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from KyPinkRN
    The people in the beds wouldn't be exposed if the nurses were actually allowed to call out sick! Don't get me wrong I'm not condoning abuse of calling off, but my hospital has a very strict policy and even if you have a Dr. excuse it's not an excused absence. I have never had a flu shot in the 13 years that I have been in healthcare... never had the flu either. It's my constitutional right not to inject something into my body if I don't want it. Personally I think that the flu vaccine is a gimmick, and a crap shoot. The virus changes each year and who knows if the shot actually covers what's going around. Just another money making scheme from the drug companies if you ask me. Nope, I'll take my chances and follow good old fashion universal precautions, cause it hasn't failed me so far.
    Please let me know which part of the constitution details out the right to not "inject something in to your body"

    Then show me in the the constitution where it says that employers are required to employ you.

    This isn't a case of constitutional rights. Employers are allowed to set conditions of employment....some hospitals establish being immunized as a condition of employment. That is their right. There is no government agency holding people down and forcing vaccinations on them....this is just a case of an employer setting a condition of employment. Any who do not wish to be vaccinated are free to not be vaccinated and work elsewhere.
    GadgetRN71, ChristaRN, RN in training, and 7 others like this.
  5. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from One2gofst
    The Virginia case is the only one I have found that reached any conclusion. It is extraneous to our argument here, though, in that only nurses who have a legally binding union contract are exempt. That is obvious that anyone with a contract could not have the new policy enforced upon them in any field. However, if it isn't implemented in the next contract, the employer need not offer them the same contract again.

    On another line of thinking, who is saying the only reason for the flu shot is to protect patients? IMO, health care facilities are places where people are more likely to come in contact with various flu strains. Would requiring a flu shot for nurses not also be a way of trying to maintain productivity of the nursing staff?
    My employer has the right to insist that I be productive and work within the rules in terms of allowed sick days and time off. It does not have the right to tell me HOW I must protect my health.
    Bella'sMyBaby likes this.
  6. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from CuriousMe
    Please let me know which part of the constitution details out the right to not "inject something in to your body"

    Then show me in the the constitution where it says that employers are required to employ you.

    This isn't a case of constitutional rights. Employers are allowed to set conditions of employment....some hospitals establish being immunized as a condition of employment. That is their right. There is no government agency holding people down and forcing vaccinations on them....this is just a case of an employer setting a condition of employment. Any who do not wish to be vaccinated are free to not be vaccinated and work elsewhere.
    And if it was not made a condition of employment when that person was hired, that person has a case for wrongful termination. A good employee who does their job faithfully and well, abides by universal precautions (which actually DOES protect patients) and does not exceed their company's policies in terms of sick days, absences, etc., and who, at their time of hire, was not required to accept mandatory vaccination, has a good case. Whether it would succeed or not is up to the courts... (obviously, if it was made clear at the time of hiring that the policy was mandatory vaccination, the employee would have no right to complain.)

    ... and if the employee IS doing all of those things... the employer is being more than a little stupid in firing them for not wanting a vaccination.
    Bella'sMyBaby likes this.
  7. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from Ella Halligan RN
    My employer has the right to insist that I be productive and work within the rules in terms of allowed sick days and time off. It does not have the right to tell me HOW I must protect my health.
    It's great that you have an opinion about what your employer can and can not require....of course your opinion doesn't impact your employer at all.

    You of course do have the right to not work for an employer who's requirements don't agree with your opinion.
    GadgetRN71 and linearthinker like this.
  8. Jan 8, '11 by
    Your employer has the right to insist that you most anything that is legal as a condition of employment. The straw man argument comparing an employer setting conditions of employment to the govt. requiring you to have an abortion is specious.

    Once again, I support your right to decide what you will do to be employed as well as an employers right to define what they require of you to be employed.
    CuriousMe likes this.
  9. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from CuriousMe
    It's great that you have an opinion about what your employer can and can not require....of course your opinion doesn't impact your employer at all.

    You of course do have the right to not work for an employer who's requirements don't agree with your opinion.
    You can keep repeating that, it won't make it true. My father worked in human resources and employment law for many years. Even at-will employment in right-to-work states can be contested in a court of law.

    In addition, the rights fought for and won by union employees are often upheld for non-union employees in court cases as precedents. That is why so many of what the nurses in California unions fight for in terms of patient loads or work safety often has a positive effect on those issues nationwide (over time).
  10. Jan 8, '11 by
    Quote from Ella Halligan RN
    You can keep repeating that, it won't make it true. My father worked in human resources and employment law for many years. Even at-will employment in right-to-work states can be contested in a court of law.

    In addition, the rights fought for and won by union employees are often upheld for non-union employees in court cases as precedents. That is why so many of what the nurses in California unions fight for in terms of patient loads or work safety often has a positive effect on those issues nationwide (over time).

    My Dad also worked in HR, and I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night...your point?

    You can contest anything in a court-of-law....that doesn't mean you'll win.
    life_aknew and One2gofst like this.