Workers fired for refusing vaccine are unlikely to qualify for unemployment, thanks Biden

Each day more employers are telling employees they need to be vaccinated against COVID-19 to work in person or risk being fired.

On Thursday, CNN revealed it had fired three unvaccinated employees for violating the company’s vaccine requirement for in-person workers, according to an internal memo signed by Jeff Zucker, the cable network’s president, and obtained by the New York Times.

Unlike millions of Americans who were laid off during the pandemic, the three former CNN employees likely won’t qualify for unemployment benefits, employment law experts told MarketWatch.

CNN parent company WarnerMedia, a unit of AT&T T, 0.20%, declined to comment on the firings.

In most states, individuals have to prove they’re out of work through no fault of their own to collect unemployment benefits.

“This often means that they are let go due to a lack of work,” said Alana Ackels, a labor and employment lawyer at Bell Nunnally, a Dallas-based law firm.

“Typically, an employee who is terminated for failing to comply with company policies is not eligible for unemployment benefits, which would include refusing to comply with a company’s COVID-19 prevention policies, masking requirements or vaccine requirements,” Ackels told MarketWatch.

But an employee who has proof of a medical exemption or religious objection to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine may still be eligible to collect unemployment benefits if fired, said Rebecca Dixon, executive director at the National Employment Law Project, a nonprofit that advocates for worker’s rights.

Otherwise, refusing to get a COVID-19 vaccine, if your employer requires one, “is akin to an employee’s refusal to submit to permissible drug tests or participate in safety trainings,” said Ronald Zambrano, employment law chair at West Coast Trial Lawyers, a Los Angeles–based law firm. That is, such an employee, when terminated, would not qualify for unemployment benefits, Zambrano said.

Ultimately, “this could lead to tens of thousands of people across the United States without work or access to unemployment benefits because they refuse to get vaccinated,” Zambrano said.

Hey biden. How’s your crackhead son and illegitmate granddaughter doing?

7 Likes

Should have Jan 6th’d harder

9 Likes

Fuck you dude, fuck you 100%, pos.

4 Likes

Fucking nazi

3 Likes

Yeah ok, I’m sure these employers have it in their contracts that state you must go though a medical procedure as a condition of employment.

3 Likes

And just like that… the Jahovas Witnesses gained millions of new members overnight!

8 Likes

why dont you people like capitalism anymore? :slightly_frowning_face: :frowning_face: :sob: :cry:

This is communism bitch!

2 Likes

ahh yes

Communism is when you insert accurate description capitalism

Who are exactly are these supposed employers?

I want company names, names of the CEO’s, management team, and BOD names.

Probably the last shot we had if we are being honest. The only thing these people understand is power and force.

Unless I’m mistaken, you only get unemployment benefits if you are laid off. If you quit or get fired you don’t qualify.

You absolutely get benefits if you are fired, as long as it isn’t something egregious/illegal that the employer can prove. As in, if you’re caught stealing on camera and they fire you, no benefits. But if they claim your performance wasn’t great or you didn’t follow orders well enough, you get unemployment. They can contest it, but the employees typically win.
Also, this CNN article by the slightly retarded OP seems pretty inaccurate, even though it has quotes from “legal experts”.

1 Like

I don’t believe that cnn let anyone go over vaccines. This is more propaganda from the fucks at the commie news network.

Christmas Vacation Ok GIF

I looked it up in my state. It looks like there is a fuzzy area and I suppose it would be up to the courts. Here is an excerpt from the rules:

To collect unemployment benefits, you must be out of work through no fault of your own. Workers who are laid off for economic reasons—due to a plant closing, a reduction-in-force (RIF), or because of lack of work, for example—are eligible for unemployment benefits. But employees who are fired are not always eligible for unemployment, at least not right away. It depends on the reasons why the employee was fired.

Yup, and here are the specific reasons employees may not receive unemployment when fired:

  • Failing a drug or alcohol test. In many states, an employee who is fired for failing a drug or alcohol test will not be able to collect unemployment benefits. Refusing to submit to testing is also a disqualifying event in some states.
  • Theft. An employee who is fired for stealing from the company or from coworkers will most likely be ineligible to receive unemployment benefits.
  • Committing a crime. An employee who commits a crime connected with the job – such as assaulting a coworker, driving under the influence while on company business, or destroying valuable company property – will almost certainly be disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.
  • Violating safety rules. An employee who makes a careless mistake may still be eligible to receive unemployment benefits, but an employee who willfully or intentionally disregards important safety rules will probably be disqualified from collecting benefits.

And to the point of this thread, comparing not taking an experimental vaccine that isn’t even currently FDA approved to failing a drug test is beyond a stretch. Some states make it harder to get unemployment, but if this is litigated, I seriously doubt it goes the way of CNN.

I’m against mandatory vaccinations. I just don’t know how the law would handle getting fired for refusing vaccination. At least in terms of unemployment benefits. What may seem just or right to you or me may not be how it’s decided in court.

I’m quoting the law in regards to what currently applies to unemployment.

Unemployment is normally given unless the employer is able to prove one of the things I listed above (in most states). To do this, they have to first dispute the unemployment claim and then provide proof at which point it may go to a hearing if it is contested.

Basically, this article is bullshit. If the courts find that forcing employees to inject an experimental vaccine is akin to failing a drug test, or a simple “policy” disagreement, we are in serious trouble. CNN is lying with nearly everything they print though, so I’m not too concerned it will go that way.