Know anyone quitting over the Federal Employee vaccine mandate?

[itsbob]

I was surprised that our Union rolled over (not really) Imagining what the same Union would have done if Trump suggested mandated vaccines.. They didn't even put up the slightest fake fight, just totally rolled over on all their members.. because a Democrat mandated it.

But worse.. what I don't like is they are requiring us supply medical records to prove it. I do not like the idea of supplying ANY documentation of my medical status. As lessons learned again and again, once you open ANY door, they are going to push their way in for more and more.

 

[itsbob]

I was surprised that our Union rolled over (not really) Imagining what the same Union would have done if Trump suggested mandated vaccines.. They didn't even put up the slightest fake fight, just totally rolled over on all their members.. because a Democrat mandated it.

But worse.. what I don't like is they are requiring us supply medical records to prove it. I do not like the idea of supplying ANY documentation of my medical status. As lessons learned again and again, once you open ANY door, they are going to push their way in for more and more.

Which brings up a question.. Why don't Unions have competition?? What if I want to be protected by a Union, but I don't agree with my Union (my only choice) and don't want to be part of their beliefs or propaganda? Why do they operate without competition and have a monopoly on any market in forced protection for its members?

 

[my-thyme]

The postal union said nope, our people are not under the mandate.

Money talks.

 

[RoseRed]

The postal union said nope, our people are not under the mandate.

Money talks.

I thought they were exempt, like the Senate and White House?

 

[my-thyme]

Yes, exempt, because their union stood behind their people who were saying they didnt trust the vaccine

 

[HemiHauler]

Yes, exempt, because their union stood behind their people who were saying they didnt trust the vaccine

No. The post office is exempt because they are an independent government agency, only very loosely under the Executive Branch for organizational purposes only. Joe Biden as chief executive only has the authority to mandate this for agencies directly in the Executive Branch of government. This is why, for example, they are not on the GS scale and have their own pension separate from FERS.

Legislative and Judicial branches of government? Same thing. Joe Biden doesn't have the authority to mandate in those branches because - wait for it: he is the CHIEF EXECUTIVE and only has authority over the Executive Branch.

My god, this is middle school civics.

And it's kids today that are "brainwashed" right?

 

[TPD]

No. The post office is exempt because they are an independent government agency, only very loosely under the Executive Branch for organizational purposes only. Joe Biden as chief executive only has the authority to mandate this for agencies directly in the Executive Branch of government. This is why, for example, they are not on the GS scale and have their own pension separate from FERS.

Legislative and Judicial branches of government? Same thing. Joe Biden doesn't have the authority to mandate in those branches because - wait for it: he is the CHIEF EXECUTIVE and only has authority over the Executive Branch.

My god, this is middle school civics.

And it's kids today that are "brainwashed" right?

Then why is houseplant mandating the jab for PRIVATE BUSINESSES?! Didn't realize they were under the purview of the executive branch.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

Judge Bars Biden Administration from Firing Unvaccinated Employees with Pending Religious Exemptions


District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction prohibiting the firing of both civilian and active-duty military federal employees while their religious exemption pleas are pending.

“None of the civilian employee plaintiffs will be subject to discipline while his or her request for a religious exception is pending,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her order obtained by Fox News. She also specified that “active duty military plaintiffs, whose religious exception requests have been denied, will not be disciplined or separated during the pendency of their appeals.”

The court also ordered the defendants in the Biden administration, including all the secretaries of the departments in the executive branch, to send a memo on Friday confirming that they will not discipline or terminate staff while the issue is still be adjudicated. According to the complaint, “plaintiffs, along with hundreds of thousands of other federal employees and active-duty service members will be terminated, discharged or separated on or before November 22, 2021.”

“The Biden administration has shown an unprecedented, cavalier attitude toward the rule of law and an utter ineptitude at basic constitutional contours,” the plaintiffs’ attorney Michael Yoder told Fox News.

This is the path the navy was always taken. However when they announced the person to contact for a religious exemption it was news to them that they were the one in charge of that. It's a total CF. I know three that are not getting it, and are waiting to be fired over it.

I think it's a game of chicken and the EO will not win out. While not the same level, I am not providing proof until after my counseling. I plan on being as big of a pain as possible.

 

[HemiHauler]

Then why is houseplant mandating the jab for PRIVATE BUSINESSES?! Didn't realize they were under the purview of the executive branch.

That power is delivered through OSHA by way of the Commerce Clause. OSHA is given broad power, for better or worse, to ensure that employers keep their staffs safe. OSHA gets is powers from the legislature and the legislature cannot give powers to OSHA that the legislature itself does not have. Understand? I'm not saying that's OK by me, but I am saying if you have a problem with that, talk to your House Rep. Steny.

There have been many cases making it to the SCOTUS and generally the broad, sweeping power OSHA has been upheld. The name of the case most relevant here escapes me.

The biggest issue with the OSHA bit is that it seems to bypass the Administrative Procedures Act, APA. There should have been a hold period where public comments could be taken in. I would have thought this would have been stopped based on that, but it wasn't.

 

[TPD]

That power is delivered through OSHA by way of the Commerce Clause. OSHA is given broad power, for better or worse, to ensure that employers keep their staffs safe. OSHA gets is powers from the legislature and the legislature cannot give powers to OSHA that the legislature itself does not have. Understand? I'm not saying that's OK by me, but I am saying if you have a problem with that, talk to your House Rep. Steny.

There have been many cases making it to the SCOTUS and generally the broad, sweeping power OSHA has been upheld. The name of the case most relevant here escapes me.

The biggest issue with the OSHA bit is that it seems to bypass the Administrative Procedures Act, APA. There should have been a hold period where public comments could be taken in. I would have thought this would have been stopped based on that, but it wasn't.

So the USPS is not covered by OSHA?

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

That power is delivered through OSHA by way of the Commerce Clause. OSHA is given broad power, for better or worse, to ensure that employers keep their staffs safe. OSHA gets is powers from the legislature and the legislature cannot give powers to OSHA that the legislature itself does not have. Understand? I'm not saying that's OK by me, but I am saying if you have a problem with that, talk to your House Rep. Steny.

There have been many cases making it to the SCOTUS and generally the broad, sweeping power OSHA has been upheld. The name of the case most relevant here escapes me.

The biggest issue with the OSHA bit is that it seems to bypass the Administrative Procedures Act, APA. There should have been a hold period where public comments could be taken in. I would have thought this would have been stopped based on that, but it wasn't.

BS!

• "If Congress meant to give an agency authority to issue a general vaccine mandate, it would have enacted a law conferring and defining that authority."

Congress Didn’t Give OSHA Authority to Impose Vaccine Mandates

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is about to require 80 million working Americans to get vaccinated. You may be among them. There’s just one catch: OSHA lacks the legal authority to impose a vaccine mandate.

www.heritage.org

 

[Clem72]

The postal union said nope, our people are not under the mandate.

Money talks.

Maybe the contractors. The other employees are definitely federal. If you think the Feds cant touch you, remember you get your healthcare from FEHB and your retirement is FERS. They will touch your naughty bits more than a Cuomo intern if they wish.

 

[Ken King]

No. The post office is exempt because they are an independent government agency, only very loosely under the Executive Branch for organizational purposes only. Joe Biden as chief executive only has the authority to mandate this for agencies directly in the Executive Branch of government. This is why, for example, they are not on the GS scale and have their own pension separate from FERS.

Legislative and Judicial branches of government? Same thing. Joe Biden doesn't have the authority to mandate in those branches because - wait for it: he is the CHIEF EXECUTIVE and only has authority over the Executive Branch.

My god, this is middle school civics.

And it's kids today that are "brainwashed" right?

USPS is an independent agency of the Executive branch - (39USC201)
Employees are covered under FERS.

 

[HemiHauler]

USPS is an independent agency of the Executive branch - (39USC201)
Employees are covered under FERS.

Thanks for the FERS correction. As to the other point, Joe Biden still doesn't/didn't have the authority to extend his EO to the USPS, and that's really the point. He didn't "exempt" them; he didn't have the authority.

 

[Ken King]

Thanks for the FERS correction. As to the other point, Joe Biden still doesn't/didn't have the authority to extend his EO to the USPS, and that's really the point. He didn't "exempt" them; he didn't have the authority.

What about the other 30 or so Independent Agencies? By your logic he doesn't have the authority to order them either, right?

Independent Agencies -

• Agency for Global Media
  • Radio Free Asia
  • Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
  • Voice of America (VOA)
• AmeriCorps
• Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
• Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• Farm Credit Administration (FCA)
• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)
• Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)
• Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA)
• General Services Administration (GSA)
• Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)
• National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
• National Archives
• National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)
• National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)
• National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)
• National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
• National Science Foundation (NSF)
• Office of Government Ethics (OGE)
• Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
• Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
• Peace Corps
• Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
• Selective Service System (SSS)
• Small Business Administration (SBA)
• Social Security Administration (SSA)
• Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
• Thrift Savings Plan (TSP)
• United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
• United States Postal Service (USPS)
  • US Postal Inspection Service
• United States Trade and Development Agency

 

[HemiHauler]

What about the other 30 or so Independent Agencies? By your logic he doesn't have the authority to order them either, right?

Really couldn't care less. And it's not my logic - if he had the authority to do so, he would have done it. I'm simply looking at the action.

 

[HemiHauler]

What about the other 30 or so Independent Agencies? By your logic he doesn't have the authority to order them either, right?

I know a few people who work for the CFPB, which was on your list now that I looked at it. As they explained to me, their management are voluntarily following the EO. That suggests that the EO didn't in fact apply to them. So I will assume the rest of the agencies you listed are either also following voluntarily or if the EO did in fact apply to them, their independent agency status is different than others legally speaking.

 

[Ken King]

I know a few people who work for the CFPB, which was on your list now that I looked at it. As they explained to me, their management are voluntarily following the EO. That suggests that the EO didn't in fact apply to them. So I will assume the rest of the agencies you listed are either also following voluntarily or if the EO did in fact apply to them, their independent agency status is different than others legally speaking.

I would say that what they explained to you is wrong. Per the EO -

Sec. 2. Mandatory Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination for Federal Employees.

Each agency shall implement, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a program to require COVID-19 vaccination for all of its Federal employees, with exceptions only as required by law. The Task Force shall issue guidance within 7 days of the date of this order on agency implementation of this requirement for all agencies covered by this order.

Sec. 3. Definitions. For the purposes of this order:
(a) The term “agency” means an Executive agency as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105 (excluding the Government Accountability Office).

5 U.S.C. 105 states

For the purpose of this title, “Executive agency” means an Executive department, a Government corporation, and an independent establishment. (bolding is my emphasis)

Per the EO the only exclusion is the GAO.

 

[GURPS]

..... OSHA is given broad power,

OSHA's power is not that broad

 

[GURPS]

Five Tentative Thoughts About The OSHA Employer Vaccine Mandate


Fifth, there will invariably be constitutional challenges. I do not think Congress could directly require people to get vaccinated. But the OSHA rule accomplishes that same task, indirectly, through regulations of private employers. Is this regulation within Congress's commerce powers? To answer that question, we have to define the relevant activity. Does this rule regulate conduct in the workplace? If so, that activity would be economic in nature. Or does this rule regulate a person's decision not to get vaccinated? The latter decision sounds an awful lot like a decision not to purchase health insurance. Remember, in NFIB v. Sebelius the "broccoli" horrible involved buying broccoli, not forcing people to eat broccoli. We were told the latter mandate would implicate the Due Process Clause. I would wager that forcing someone to eat a vegetable is less intrusive than forcing someone to receive a vaccine. I hope the ACLU agrees.
Even if this authority is within Congress's commerce powers, it may go beyond Congress's Necessary and Proper powers. In other words, it is not a proper use of federal power to require 100 million Americans to become vaccinated. The federal government is not simply banning guns in school zones, or prohibiting domestic violence, or growing marijuana. This rule require forcible injection of substances in the bodies--a power never before exercised by Congress. "Bodily autonomy" interest are at stake. Moreover, there is a strong federalism angle. Such health and safety laws are traditionally within the state police power. And the federal policy preempts all state laws which prohibit vaccine mandates.
OSHA will also likely raise arguments based on "collective action" federalism-- a common argument from NFIB. To prevent the spread of COVID between the several states, Congress can regulate this local activity. Still that activity must be economic in nature. Believe it or not, this precise issue came up during NFIB v. Sebelius oral arguments. I blogged about it in a now-prescient 2015 post. (I could have never fathomed that my work on Obamacare would become relevant in so many contexts.) Justice Breyer asked Attorney Michael Carvin whether the federal government could mandate inoculation against an epidemic. Mike Carvin answered no, based on Morrison (a case Breyer dissented in).