Montana becomes the first U.S. state to ban vaccine requirements for employees

[Swordsmyth]

While many large companies across the U.S. have announced that COVID-19 vaccines will be required for their employees to return to work in-person, there is one state where such requirements are banned: Montana.

Under a new law passed by the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature earlier this year, requiring vaccines as a condition for employment is deemed “discrimination” and a violation of the state’s human rights laws.

Montana is the only state in the U.S. with a law like this for private employers, said Hemi Tewarson, executive director of the National Academy for State Health Policy.

GOP lawmakers who supported the bill in the state Legislature said it was needed in response to employers “coercing” employees to get vaccinations under threat of termination. Some of the loudest supporters of the bill were employees of Benefis Health System in Great Falls who were told earlier this year that COVID-19 vaccines would be necessary to keep their jobs.

Benefis was forced to backtrack on that plan when the law was signed by Gov. Greg Gianforte in May.

Gianforte, a former business executive who founded and ran a technology company, gave the bill the green light after changing it to allow health care facilities to require unvaccinated workers and those who refuse to disclose their vaccination status to wear masks and take other precautions.

He stood behind the law this week amid heightened scrutiny.

“While the governor continues to encourage Montanans to receive safe and effective vaccines, doing so is voluntary and no individual should face discrimination based on vaccination status,” Brooke Stroyke, a spokesperson for Gianforte, said in an email.

More at: https://fortune.com/2021/08/20/monta...nts-employees/

[Anti Federalist]

Good!

[oyarde]

Pretty sad that is needed in america . A place where employers should never have felt they had govt or court support with that type of activity in the first place .

[Sonny Tufts]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views. Why is government coercion bad when it comes to minimum wages, OSHA requirements, environmental regulations, and civil rights legislation, yet it's OK to restrict an employer's right to determine the terms under which he employs someone in this instance?

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views. Why is government coercion bad when it comes to minimum wages, OSHA requirements, environmental regulations, and civil rights legislation, yet it's OK to restrict an employer's right to determine the terms under which he employs someone in this instance?

Standard Alinsky response.

[oyarde]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views. Why is government coercion bad when it comes to minimum wages, OSHA requirements, environmental regulations, and civil rights legislation, yet it's OK to restrict an employer's right to determine the terms under which he employs someone in this instance?

I've been retired for six yrs but I never entered any employment where I agreed to the employer changing the terms of employment at a later date to include unproven , unsafe , ineffective , non approved vaccines for something as simple as a cold. I doubt others have as well.

[Sonny Tufts]

Standard Alinsky response.

And yours appears to be a standard Walt Whitman response -- "Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself".

[acptulsa]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views.

You consider collusion to coerce libertarian and free market?

That's interesting. Are you serious about that, or are you just a trained monkey flinging whatever poo you can find?

[Sonny Tufts]

I've been retired for six yrs but I never entered any employment where I agreed to the employer changing the terms of employment at a later date to include unproven , unsafe , ineffective , non approved vaccines for something as simple as a cold. I doubt others have as well.

Most people have at-will employment arrangements under which the employer can change the rules at any time.

I've never heard of someone dying from a cold (not the same thing as pneumonia), and the Pfizer vaccine has been approved and is extremely effective against hospitalization and death.

[RJB]

Standard Alinsky response.

Free market is different from corporatism. It's like Satan tempting Jesus in the desert by quoting scripture.

[Sonny Tufts]

You consider collusion to coerce libertarian and free market?

That's interesting. Are you serious about that, or are you just a trained monkey flinging whatever poo you can find?

Well, I see the Peanut Gallery is out in full force, deflecting the topic of discussion away from governmental interference in private contracts.

I am serious. Who is colluding? Don't tell me you think an employer who requires his employees to be vaccinated (especially if the employee is working in a hospital, for God's sake) is part of some kind of global conspiracy run by Big Pharma.

[Sonny Tufts]

Free market is different from corporatism. It's like Satan tempting Jesus in the desert by quoting scripture.

I agree there's a tension between free markets and corporations. But is the alternative to allow the government an unlimited power to regulate corporations in exchange for the insulation from personal liability the shareholders enjoy?

[RJB]

I agree there's a tension between free markets and corporations. But is the alternative to allow the government an unlimited power to regulate corporations in exchange for the insulation from personal liability the shareholders enjoy?

Well, next time a Boeing, GE, an oil corp. etc. funded news channel calls for war, and you buy that, join the Marines and go fight for those corporations.

[acptulsa]

Well, I see the Peanut Gallery is out in full force, deflecting the topic of discussion away from governmental interference in private contracts.

Is that what the thread is about? Are you sure? Did you post the OP?

I am serious. Who is colluding? Don't tell me you think an employer who requires his employees to be vaccinated (especially if the employee is working in a hospital, for God's sake) is part of some kind of global conspiracy run by Big Pharma.

Are you seriously arguing that the international pharmaceuticals don't exercise considerable influence over hospitals?

[Brian4Liberty]

And yours appears to be a standard Walt Whitman response -- "Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself".

Free market is different from corporatism. It's like Satan tempting Jesus in the desert by quoting scripture.

“Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”

“You oppose government and laws? The Bill of Rights is nothing but government laws, thus you should oppose them, or you are a hypocrite. Meanwhile, we shall impose a massive dictatorial state, because we do not oppose our laws or government, and we do not care if laws contradict themselves, or if we contradict ourselves, because we have no such limiting morals.”

[RJB]

Are you seriously arguing that the international pharmaceuticals don't exercise considerable influence over hospitals?

Not to mention the majority of the media, agencies that supposedly govern them, politicians...

(I can honestly say that neither Big Pharma nor Big Natural Health-- if there is such a thing-- paid me to say this.)

[RJB]

“Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”

“You oppose government and laws? The Bill of Rights is nothing but government laws, thus you should oppose them, or you are a hypocrite. Meanwhile, we shall impose a massive dictatorial state, because we do not oppose our laws or government, and we do not care if laws contradict themselves, or if we contradict ourselves, because we have no such limiting morals.”

Yep. The Father of Lies quotes Scripture and the Constitution.

[Krugminator2]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views. Why is government coercion bad when it comes to minimum wages, OSHA requirements, environmental regulations, and civil rights legislation, yet it's OK to restrict an employer's right to determine the terms under which he employs someone in this instance?

Why would you be surprised? There threads wanting to crack down on the free association of tech companies, anti-free trade and immigration threads, threads that support DeSantis outlawing mask requirements for private businesses, and threads supporting a lunatic nurse who fraudulently injected people with saline solution instead of vaccine.

Just look at the thread right below this one. People are complaining about mommy FDA approving the vaccines too quickly. My complaint is the FDA exists at all so there is a pretty wide chasm between some and liberty views.

[acptulsa]

Just look at the thread right below this one. People are complaining about mommy FDA approving the vaccines too quickly. My complaint is the FDA exists at all so there is a pretty wide chasm between some and liberty views.

Piss poor spin. Even Alinsky would cringe.

Your attempt to put words into the mouths of others can't disguise the fact that everyone in the thread in question is merely noting that the FDA abandoned its own methods and completely failed to do its stated job.

In other words, the people you're condemning for suffering the FDA to exist are wondering why the FDA even exists.

Of course, you don't promise to meet Alinsky's standards, only Paul Krugman's. Congratulations. You've met them.

[Krugminator2]

Your attempt to put words into the mouths of others can't disguise the fact that everyone in the thread in question is merely noting that the FDA abandoned its own methods and completely failed to do its stated job.

In other words, the people you're condemning for suffering the FDA to exist are wondering why the FDA even exists.

Original poster quote

Yup, politics and money over science and our health and welfare.

Zero of the posts in thread wonder why the FDA exists.

Call me whatever you want. Alinsky, Krugman. It isn't a matter of honest disagreement. A person who thinks businesses shouldn't be able to mandate vaccination is authoritarian and wrong.

[RJB]

At first I was indignant, but now I am thankful that the boot on my neck was privately funded.

[acptulsa]

Original poster quote

Yup, politics and money over science and our health and welfare.

Zero of the posts in thread wonder why the FDA exists.

Call me whatever you want. Alinsky, Krugman. It isn't a matter of honest disagreement. A person who thinks businesses shouldn't be able to mandate vaccination is authoritarian and wrong.

Politics and money taking precedence over science and health is exactly why the FDA should not exist, and the UL is a far superior model.

I'm sorry you can't keep track of that, and need it all spelled out again, over and over, in every thread. But that's no reflection on the rest of us.

Keep going with your defense of fascism, your "the Holocaust was fine because corporations wanted the slave labor" tripe. No one's buying it, not even prog lurkers.

[Dr.3D]

Most people have at-will employment arrangements under which the employer can change the rules at any time.

I've never heard of someone dying from a cold (not the same thing as pneumonia), and the Pfizer vaccine has been approved and is extremely effective against hospitalization and death.

Approved?

The "vaccine" trials won't be finished till sometime in 2023.

Where is the science, showing how effective they are against those things.

For all they know, Antibody Dependent Enhancement will make the so called vaccine lethal to those who received it.

It is prudent to let the vaccine trials be concluded and hope nobody lies about the results, before declaring them safe.

[oyarde]

Most people have at-will employment arrangements under which the employer can change the rules at any time.

I've never heard of someone dying from a cold (not the same thing as pneumonia), and the Pfizer vaccine has been approved and is extremely effective against hospitalization and death.

They make a pneumonia shot . It does kill people every yr. I guess if you want one you should get one.

[ammodotcom]

I'm surprised at these anti-free market and anti-libertarian views. Why is government coercion bad when it comes to minimum wages, OSHA requirements, environmental regulations, and civil rights legislation, yet it's OK to restrict an employer's right to determine the terms under which he employs someone in this instance?

Might be a different story if the government didn't so heavily regulate and influence what private companies are able to do.

[acptulsa]

Might be a different story if the government didn't so heavily regulate and influence what private companies are able to do...

...and major companies didn't run the government like just another of their departments.

[enhanced_deficit]

Biden seems unwilling or too tied up with other things at the moment, perhaps Trump can kneecap the State leaders there to set them straight the way he knee-capped GA gov for not following strict CDC lockdown guidelines. It's not that he's retired fully, he just spoke out in favor of keeping us troops at a military base in Afghanistan.

[CaptUSA]

I wonder what would happen if a business fired employees for having abortions?

I mean, they're a private business, right? They have every right to make their employee's personal medical decisions a condition of employment, right?

Screw passing anti-abortion laws that protect the lives of the unborn, let's just target corporations. Put pressure on them to fire anyone who is known to have engaged in that practice. Oh? It's a personal matter that an employer shouldn't be concerned about?? Hmm...

[pcosmar]

Well, I see the Peanut Gallery is out in full force, deflecting the topic of discussion away from governmental interference in private contracts.

It ceases to be anything like a private contract when the Government is involved..

From "Piss Test" to SS#.

[pcosmar]

I agree there's a tension between free markets and corporations. But is the alternative to allow the government an unlimited power to regulate corporations in exchange for the insulation from personal liability the shareholders enjoy?

Corporations were once Illegal and considered immoral.

And then Corporations were Legalized and Government became a Partner in that immorality.

Traditionally Usury was frowned upon,,and condemned by most religions as well.

but it was legalized by the same folks.