But the accommodations they offer must not impose an undue burden or more than minimal cost to the employer
I donât think thatâs trueâŠfor example, there are many private colleges that are not allowing religious exemptions for covid vaccines. I imagine they have legal staff approval for that policy.
3 Likes
Seems youâre working hard to find straws to grasp to me.
If someone refuses a vaccine claiming their decision is due to fetal testing at the level it happened, they should also refuse these other meds - plain and simple. If itâs a true religious belief, they donât get to pick and choose because they think the fetal line doesnât matter for a headache, but it does when public health is at stake.
12 Likes
Donât want to debate this point because itâs a matter of theology, doctrine and apologetics, with different denominations having potentially different viewpoints on some of the fine lines. This is precisely why employers probably shouldnât be delving into those religious debates and judgements but rather simply ask for a public statement from those who represent that employeesâs faith tradition. After all, this is a âreligious exemptionâ we are talking about here, and âreligionâ is recognized as an organized practice (even if a small congregation). Of course, the employerâs representatives may wish to grant a âreligiousâ exemption based on their own particular understanding of âreligionâ - they should make that clear, especially if they are asking employees to sign away their right to baby aspirin or albuterol (two medicines which can be life-saving in the moment with no clear substitutions; unlike the vaccine which is a substitute for things like social distancing, frequent testing and mask-wearing).
Obviously they arenât asking anyone to sign away their ârightâ to baby aspirin. They are trying to separate sincere and consistent religious beliefs from the convenient âbeliefsâ of people looking to use religion as a work around to avoid the vaccination.
12 Likes
Employees are treated differently from students. Although employers have an obligation under title 7 to offer accommodations in limited circumstances, it may be possible that some employers have determined that no reasonable accommodation is possible for that type of job-for example, United Airlines decision to place any religious objector on indefinite leave without pay.
3 Likes
There are 500+ colleges/unis that have mandated vaccines per the Chron of Higher Ed. Can you provide a few examples of private ones that do not allow a request for religious exemption, or an accomodation?
And note, colleges wear multiple hats that fall under different rules. Colleges are major employers; colleges are also a type of business in that they are a provider of services to customers, i.e., students; colleges are also research places and have to follow federal discrimination rules if they accept federal money.
I believe roycroftmom answered the question above, noting the difference between staff (must allow for, but penalty can be harsh as in being placed on mandatory leave without pay) and students (donât have to offer a religious exemption, one example is Bowdoin).
1 Like
Santa Clara University
Trinity College
Bowdoin
Many others listed here . . .
1 Like
I know more than a handful of vaccine reluctant folks who have suddenly found religion. Or at least that is what they are trying to tell their employers to get an exemption from the shot.
For meâŠthat is an issue!
11 Likes
They may change their faith when the accommodation offered is not to their liking. Our exempt employees will need to provide to us their own negative test weekly if not vaxxed. That is costly and time-consuming
3 Likes
Page describing what various religions say about vaccination:
2 Likes
Just to be clearâŠthe unvaccinated employees have to test weeklyâŠat their own expense?
I definitely support that and agree that will be a pain, plus expensive. Do home based tests worked (observed by a third party) or do they have to test at a healthcare setting?
This is happening around here. Employers are not paying for these tests.
5 Likes
Any FDA approved test bearing date and time stamp works for us
My mom has a group of friends from her HS days - keep in touch through texting etc - all were anti vax - all just got vaccinated this past week - just like that âŠshe never thought they would! so itâs possible.
10 Likes
We just today lost a neighbor. Member of the local âNo Covaxâ mega church. 63. Healthy. Spent 4 weeks on a vent and two on continuous dialysis.
Iâm so sad for my friend her husband and so angry for the people who are making this a thing.
Just get the shot.
6 Likes
What seems to be lost in this overall conversation is the fact that people should never be able to use âreligionâ as a work around - not for this vaccine or any other. Religion isnât the same thing as personal conscience. It is an organized expression of personal conscience or spirituality (ETA typically as a set of specified beliefs). Therefore, it usually comes with verifiable evidence: membership, attestations, statements on specific matters of faith and morals, and so forth. By third parties who are usually authorities on the subject.
The health system in the article may have confused âreligionâ and âpersonal conscienceâ in the past regarding its flu vaccine requirement. Thatâs evidence enough that it perhaps shouldnât be practicing catechetics on the fly. Now, they have painted the âfetal cell lineâ issue (as the CEO calls it) with a rather broad brush. The medications listed, their connection with (or degree of removal from) fetal cells in testing or development, and their specific uses (emergency, occasional, etc) - are probably as numerous and varied as the employeesâ religious denominations and faith traditions. There is also the issue of compelling an employee, under threat of termination, to choose between their sincerely-held religious beliefs and their own physicianâs advice (as some medicines might have been prescribed).
By all means an employer can use the opportunity to educate the employees on the pervasiveness of fetal cells in the development and testing of medicines. They can require that employees read that list and attest their understanding that the Covid vaccine isnât alone in relying on fetal cell lines. Those seem like appropriate practices for a health system (which surely grapples daily with ethical matters) and so would be in this employerâs wheelhouse. Requiring that oneâs employees have the facts seems quite reasonable. Requiring that oneâs employees provide third party evidence of their sincerely-held belief also seems quite reasonable. This employer is doing something different, which is to require employees to meet the employerâs own version of what constitutes a âsincerely-held belief.â Itâs a substitution of the employerâs beliefs for the individualâs. Not sure thatâs an appropriate threshold for granting a âreligious exemptionâ since at its core itâs not really respecting religion (or religious differences, for that matter). Thatâs my take, at any rate.
1 Like
Weâll just have to agree to disagree.
1 Like
I agree!