by Corinne Murdock | Nov 21, 2021 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
City of Phoenix employees will have until January 18, 2022, to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The new policy doesn’t offer an exemption for those working remotely. The city explained in its letter to employees that it was complying with President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors, due to the number of contracts held by the city.
As thanks for their compliance, the city will give the vaccinated employee $75. The cash perk was initially used as an incentive this past year. Assuming every one of their over 14,000 employees remains on staff and gets vaccinated, then the city will hand out a total of over a million dollars. As of their latest reports, the city has handed out over 6,900 of their compliance cash.
Phoenix Councilman Sal DiCiccio warned in an interview with KTAR that this mandate would only make the city lose more police officers at a time when their law enforcement is critically manned. He also challenged the city’s rationale that a sweeping mandate was required because they receive federal funds. DiCiccio asserted that the city of Phoenix isn’t a federal contractor.
“I’ve already sent a letter to the city manager asking him to identify exactly which contracts the city of Phoenix has,” said DiCiccio. “I can tell you police, fire and some other personnel with the city of Phoenix are not contractors – that’s a bunch of BS.”
DiCiccio also insisted that the main point of the mandate was to target first responders.
“It’s meant to attack them at various levels: [to] attack them personally, attack their families and now go after them this way,” said DiCiccio.
The councilman’s remarks reflect on the fact that the lowest vaccination rates in the Valley are among police officers and firefighters. Tucson’s vaccine mandate for all city employees – announced in August – hit those first responders the hardest.
As the city revealed this latest policy, companies around Phoenix have been advertising that they are hiring with “no vaccine required.”
City employees may request religious or medical exemptions by December 31 – New Year’s Eve.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Nov 7, 2021 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) may not prohibit nursing students with a religious objection to the COVID-19 vaccine from completing clinical rotations due to being unvaccinated, according to the U.S. District Court for Arizona.
U.S. District Judge Steven Logan issued the ruling Friday, as he’d promised at the hearing on Monday. The two plaintiffs – nursing students Emily Thoms and Kamaleilani Moreno – were granted a preliminary injunction against MCCCD’s vaccination requirement. Thoms and Moreno will be able to complete their nursing programs one way or another, whether by accommodation or through regular clinical rotations, by their scheduled graduation date next month.
“Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of both of their claims, that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm absent injunction, and that the balance of equities and the public interest weigh in their favor,” wrote Logan. “Their case is not doubtful, and the harm that they have alleged – the violation of their constitutional and fundamental right to free exercise – is an injury of the highest order under the Constitution and the law. Such an injury cannot be remedied by damages.”
While MCCCD claimed that they required universal vaccination due to their clinical partners’ requirements, Logan cited evidence given by the plaintiffs to the contrary. This evidence included MCCCD previously providing similar accommodations to other students for both religious and non-religious reasons: simulated clinicals, extra assignments, finding new clinical sites, and swapping assigned clinic sites requiring vaccination with those that didn’t.
Logan did note that Thoms and Moreno hurt their case by framing the lawsuit as a challenge to a “vaccine mandate,” because MCCCD doesn’t define its vaccine requirements as a mandate. For that reason, Logan modified their request for relief.
“The only vaccine mandates in this case belong to Defendant’s clinical partners, who are not parties before the Court. Rather, Defendant’s Policy is a set of requirements that together, when applied to Plaintiffs, are likely to substantially burden Plaintiffs’ right to freely exercise their sincere religious beliefs in violation of FERA and the First Amendment, to cause Plaintiffs irreparable harm, and to go against the public interest,” wrote Logan.
Both Christians, Thoms and Moreno objected to the COVID-19 vaccine due to its reliance on fetal cell lines during its testing, development, and production.
MCCCD Board Member Kathleen Winn criticized the district’s decision to hire a group of attorneys just to fight two nursing students. She also asserted that the nursing department head lied in court.
When this started back in August the administration could have done what this judge ordered us to do here. Instead we hired 5 attorneys to fight against these nursing students who represent thousands more in our state. The head of our nursing department lied in court, was caught and the judge made the best decision for these students allowing them their religious exemptions. If we appeal we are using taxpayers money to do so. Stand with these nursing students…I am proud of them and the moral courage to put it all on the line for the greater good!
https://www.facebook.com/kathleen.winn.3/posts/10221348773895842
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Nov 5, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Criticism continues to grow against a sweeping new federal mandate supported by the Biden Administration which requires private employers of 100 or more employees to develop and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy.
The mandate, outlined in a 490-page document, is referred to as an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS). It establishes a Jan. 4, 2022 deadline for compliance, and requires employees of those companies to be vaccinated or be forced to wear a face covering at work while undergoing regular COVID-19 testing at the employee’s expense.
The Industrial Commission of Arizona (ICA) and the Arizona Attorney General’s Office are pushing back on the mandate which is estimated to cover more than 84 million employees, or about two-thirds of America’s private-sector workforce. OSHA estimates that about 23 million Americans will choose to undergo the vaccination to preserve their jobs.
On Thursday, the ICA issued a statement that Arizona businesses are not bound by OSHA’s mandate unless the commissioners vote to formally adopt a similar policy. Arizona is one of 22 states previously granted federal approval to operate a state plan to address issues typically under the purview of OSHA.
Then on Friday morning, Arizona was one of 11 state plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit filed in the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals against President Joe Biden and OSHA to stop the COVID-19 ETS. The petition contends the vaccination mandate “is unconstitutional, unlawful, and unwise” and an attempt to infringe on the States’ powers expressly reserved by the Tenth Amendment.
In addition to Arizona, the attorneys general from Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming are plaintiffs.
Also on Friday, State Rep. Steve Kaiser criticized the White House’s support of the workplace vaccine mandate, calling it “an onerous and overreaching policy that will hurt businesses and the people who they employ.”
Kaiser, a Republican who represents LD15 covering north Phoenix and Cave Creek, owns Junk King, a Phoenix area franchise providing removal and hauling services.
“As a small business owner, it’s clear to me that Biden’s policy would force employees to choose between being vaccinated against their will, completing weekly COVID-19 testing (at their own expense), or losing their jobs. That’s wrong,” he said. “It’s more critical than ever that Arizona defend businesses and their employees and ensure their ability to continue making decisions for themselves – instead of liberal politicians in Washington.”
According to Kaiser, state officials are doing the right thing by trying to protect Arizonans who would be harmed by implementation of what he calls a “terrible” mandate. He supports ICA’s position that Arizona -and not OSHA- has had the exclusive responsibility for nearly 50 years for developing and enforcing any occupational safety and health standards within the state.
“Under Arizona’s long-approved state-plan procedures, the Industrial Commission has exclusive authority to decide if, when, and to what extent the State of Arizona will adopt the OSHA vaccination ETS,” the ICA statement reads. “Arizona has a 47-year track record of protecting the safety and health of Arizona’s workers and remains fully committed to this mission.”
The ETS requires employers to determine the vaccination status of each employee, obtain acceptable proof of vaccination, maintain records of each employee’s vaccination status, and maintain a roster of each employee’s vaccination status. It also requires employers to provide employees with a variety of information and literature about COVID-19 and to provide an employee “reasonable time and paid sick leave to recover from side effects experienced following each dose.”
In addition, employers are now mandated to report work-related COVID-19 fatalities to OSHA within 8 hours of learning about them, and work-related COVID-19 in-patient hospitalizations within 24 hours of the employer learning about the hospitalization.
For now, OSHA officials are less confident that smaller employers can implement a mandatory vaccination policy “without undue disruption.” But it appears those smaller businesses could be facing a similar mandate in the future.
“OSHA needs additional time to assess the capacity of smaller employers, and is seeking comment to help the agency make that determination,” it says.
by Terri Jo Neff | Oct 12, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
Since March 2020 it has become easier for federal employees to apply for benefits under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) if they contracted COVID-19 related to their jobs. Now, most federal employees will be able to pursue similar benefits for adverse reactions experienced due to mandatory vaccinations.
According to FECA Bulletin 2022-01, workers’ compensation benefits cover injuries that occur in the performance of duty and generally do not authorize provision of preventive measures such as vaccines and inoculations. But on Sept. 9, President Joe Biden issued an executive order making COVID-19 vaccination a requirement of most federal employment, both new and existing, by Nov. 22.
“As such, employees impacted by this mandate who receive required COVID-19 vaccinations on or after the date of the executive order may be afforded coverage under the FECA for any adverse reactions to the vaccine itself, and for any injuries sustained while obtaining the vaccination,” according to the FECA bulletin dated Oct. 1.
If a FECA claim is received for a COVID-19 vaccination prior to Sept. 9, coverage is afforded “only if the vaccine was administered or sponsored by the employing agency,” the bulletin states.
Biden’s executive order applies to any executive agency that fall under the executive branch of the government (excluding the Government Accountability Office), even if the employee is engaged in telework or works remotely.
Eligibility under FECA benefits will extend to injuries sustained as “the direct result of an employee receiving their mandated vaccination,” such as accidents while commuting to and from a vaccination site, as well as slip and fall injuries occurring at the vaccination site.
Biden’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate allows for limited accommodations for employees who cannot be vaccinated “because of a disability or because of a sincerely held religious belief, practice or observance.” There is currently no FECA coverage for booster vaccinations.
Postal Service employees are not included in the Sept. 9 executive order but are expected to be subject to a vaccination requirement under upcoming temporary orders from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for companies with 100 or more employees. There has been no announcement as to when OSHA’s rules will be announced or go into effect.
COVID-19 vaccinations are not the only pandemic related claims which FECA deals with.
In March 2020, then-President Donald Trump announced that federal employees who contract COVID-19 through their jobs would be entitled to coverage under FECA. Special case handling considerations were put in place for those engaged in high-risk duties such as members of law enforcement, first responders, and front-line medical and public health personnel. But all other employees were required to provide a factual statement and any available evidence concerning exposure in an attempt to obtain benefits.
Then in October 2020, FECA announced new procedures for approving claims of those employees whose positions were not classified as high-risk but their individual employment circumstances “are the same or similar to the circumstances for high-risk determination by position.”
This was followed in March when Section 4016 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 became law. It relaxed the FECA rules once again, making it easier for most federal employees diagnosed with COVID-19 to file a claim for an injury “proximately caused by employment” if their duties required contact with patients, members of the public, or co-workers, or included a risk of exposure to the virus prior to the diagnosis.
In May, the U.S. Department of Labor announced that any COVID-19 related FECA claims denied or withdrawn prior to March 12 would be eligible for review by the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) under the new eligibility criteria. The advisory also encouraged anyone who believed they had contracted COVID-19 “as a result of” federal employment to file a FECA claim.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Sep 18, 2021 | Opinion
By the Free Enterprise Club |
It felt like we were heading this direction for quite some time. Well, here we are. Last week, President Biden made an outrageous announcement. Any employer that has 100 or more employees will be required to mandate vaccines. Not only is this a blatant abuse of power, but it ignores the fact that issues like this are supposed to be left to states.
And Arizona’s lawmakers, who were elected by the people, did address this back in July, taking keep steps to protect our state from more COVID overreach. In particular, the state legislature passed SB1819, which includes a provision that amends the ability of the state to require vaccination during a public health emergency to allow for an individual to refuse vaccination based on their personal beliefs.
But apparently, our president—or is he our king now—does not care one bit about your freedom or personal choice.
Instead, King Biden would rather maneuver around the U.S. Constitution and use the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to establish this ridiculous “emergency workplace safety rule.”
Remember when this was just about “flattening the curve”? It wasn’t that long ago.
And it also wasn’t that long ago when then-Senator Kamala Harris said she would not take the vaccine if President Trump mandated it. This administration can’t even get its own talking points straight. Or maybe that’s just something else they don’t care about.
But there is something they do want: to take away more of your freedoms. That’s why the Arizona Free Enterprise Club jumped into action immediately. For the past week, we’ve been urging Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich to sue the Biden administration. This vaccine mandate will affect more than 100 million Americans. And it is one of the most extreme infringements on both businesses and individual rights in U.S. history…
>>> READ MORE >>>
