Poll of the Day > NYC Waitress is FIRED because she REFUSED to get MANDATORY COVID VACCINATION!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

34 y/o Bonnie Jacobson tells Dailymail that she was FIRED from her job after she told her bosses that she was going to WAIT to get the COVID-19 vaccine until she learns more about the side effects on women who are pregnant!!

The New York City employee said she is not an "anti-vaxxer" but wanted to wait for more research as she recently started trying to get pregnant with her husband and is worried the side effects might harm the child

She started working at Red Hook Tavern in August and the restaurant sent out an email on February 8 that said "If you choose to get vaccinated, here's what you need to know"

She told her manager during a meeting that she was going to wait and her manager initially understood her concerns telling her she wouldn't be required to get it until they changed their mind a few days later and sent workers an email stating it was now mandatory

It said "Please be advised that we will require that all employees will receive the vaccination. This will be mandatory for all existing employees and any new hires. The exception to this policy will be if your own personal health or disability prohibits you from obtaining this vaccination. We encourage you to consult your healthcare profesional to determine if getting a vaccine is righ for you"

But Bonnie said she employeed her employers about not wanting it who said "i am choosing not ot get the vaccine because there just isn't enough data or research at this point on its effect on fertility. While i fully suport the vaccine and understand its importance i do believe this is a very personal choice. I really hope this choice would not affect my employment at Red Hook Tavern"

She insists she takes COVID very seriously and practiced social distancing guidelines as she regularly gets tested and has never tested positive.

She said once there is more research, which could take MONTHS or even YEARS, she will get it but now is not the time.

But she got an email back stating they respected her decision but in order to be employed she has to get vaccinated and that at this time her employment is terminated and they are sad to see her go but if she changes her mind to let them know.

Dailymail talked to owner Billy Durney for comment as he said he wishes he handled this differently. NY hs been hit hard by the pandemic and he thought this was the perfect opportunity to reopen fully if every employee is vaccinated as he made the decision that was best for everyone

Bonnie however says there is no evidence it causes infertility but not enough data to prove otherwise and said as a 34 y/o woman why take the risk now when a lot more older people are at more risk than her who could use it such as her 68 y/o Dad with diabetes as there is no reason she should get it for someone as young as her.

She is frustrated because she wasn't offered her job back..

There are guidelines where companies can require employees to get vaccinated as there is no mandatory vaccination and only provides "reasonable" accomodations for those with disabilities but some experts already say that businesses have extensive rights to require vaccination as a health and safety rule and unless the CDC recommends pregnant women not to get it, they have that right

Do you think they made the right decision to fire her?

https://i.imgur.com/oJRcvME.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/nejlwpv.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/OFaxEG5.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/BLFcY1G.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/wh4Vavh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/oEb9mbd.jpg
---

I understand her decision. I also waited because I was on like 4 different pills when they were offering it. And still fighting off an infection. So I get it. Though, they can fire her since she didnt get the mandatory shot. It sucks, though...
---

Fair next

I think he was within his right to let her go and require the vaccine so he can re-open his business.
I don't think she was in the wrong either, but he has every right to let her go.
As long as she's allowed to collect unemployment. Laid off she would for sure, "terminated" (ie, fired) is less clear. If the restaurant tries to fight her unemployment claim, he's a jerk.

Full Throttle posted...

It said "Please be advised that we will require that all employees will receive the vaccination. This will be mandatory for all existing employees and any new hires. The exception to this policy will be if your own personal health or disability prohibits you from obtaining this vaccination. We encourage you to consult your healthcare profesional to determine if getting a vaccine is righ for you"

So they literally offered her an out then got mad when she took it. Makes them look like douchebags. Doubly so given that they never even offered her an ultimatum on it.

Full Throttle posted...

But she got an email back stating they respected her decision but in order to be employed she has to get vaccinated and that at this time her employment is terminated and they are sad to see her go but if she changes her mind to let them know.

...what? That's a lot of double-talk right there. So instead of offering her an ultimatum, they went ahead and fired her then... ugh, that's just stupid. I guess it's like a reverse ultimatum? idk.

Full Throttle posted... Do you think they made the right decision to fire her?

idk. Maybe not the way they did it. However, for liability reasons, it might make sense. Unless they're required by law to do this, it's not really a matter of right or wrong, it's just their choice.

streamofthesky posted...

I think he was within his right to let her go and require the vaccine so he can re-open his business.

Was that actually a condition of re-opening his business? Or is it just him covering his ass?

---

I totally get not wanting it while pregnant, but I understand the employer not being fine with it too. It's just a shitty situation and neither one of them is in the wrong.

Zeus posted...

Was that actually a condition of re-opening his business? Or is it just him covering his ass.

I'm guessing a lot of potential patrons would feel more comfortable if he can say all employees have gotten the vaccine.
Not sure if it's officially required, but practically speaking, he probably thinks he needs it in order to convince people to congregate there again.
Not so much "covering his ass" in the sense of fearing lawsuits or something.

Monopoman posted...

Fair next

---

> The exception to this policy will be if your own personal health or disability prohibits you from obtaining this vaccination. We encourage you to consult your healthcare profesional to determine if getting a vaccine is righ for you"

This seems fair and reasonable exemption.

---

I hate her stupid puppy dog eyes. Fire her and throw her in jail.

---

Are the vaccines even available to the general public in NY yet?

---

From the CDC:

"There are (should be is) limited data about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines for people who are pregnant"

Her hesitations are justified.

---

Full Throttle posted...

wanted to wait for more research as she recently started trying to get pregnant with her husband and is worried the side effects might harm the child

Wait, so she's not even pregnant yet, just worried about what might happen if she ends up getting pregnant at some indeterminate time after getting the vaccine? That's a reach, and if she's really concerned, she can just hold off on the babymaking for a few months. Hardly the end of the world. I'm definitely inclined to side with the business here, in that case.

Zeus posted...

So they literally offered her an out then got mad when she took it.

Not really. It doesn't sound like she consulted a doctor to validate her health concerns, and she wasn't pregnant yet. It sounds like she tried to take it, but wasn't actually eligible.

Zeus posted...

Was that actually a condition of re-opening his business? Or is it just him covering his ass?

There's a good chance it's going to end up being a requirement, though the "muh freedom" types are going to be fighting such legislation. Regardless, it's a practical requirement to be able to operate a business in a manner that minimizes the risk of infection for staff and customers, especially as infection control measures start to relax. Self-imposing that condition is quite reasonable.

SunWuKung420 posted...

"There are (should be is) limited data

Actually, "data" is plural. The singular is "datum," though that's very much fallen out of colloquial speech in favour of using "data" for both. Regardless, using a plural verb is correct there, as the body of data to which they are referring consists of more than one datum.

---

adjl posted...

Wait, so she's not even pregnant yet, just worried about what might happen if she ends up getting pregnant at some indeterminate time after getting the vaccine? That's a reach, and if she's really concerned, she can just hold off on the babymaking for a few months. Hardly the end of the world. I'm definitely inclined to side with the business here, in that case.

I think it depends. She could be taking fertility treatments of drugs. And they could be actively trying. Which I think is better to do consecutively. But it just kind of depends on whats actually going on with her...
---

Saw this one on the news a while back, at which time the information made it seem more questionable on the part of the business. Reading this however, I support the way this was handled 100%. The employee had reasonable justification for her stance (COVID-19 vaccine has been tested on various groups, but was only just starting its testing on those with child), and the employer handled the situation professionally, explaining that the vaccine was mandatory, and expressing interest should she reverse the decision that cost her her job.

Trust the vaccine, or trust her fear. The choice was hers, and it very much sounds like it still is. If she were to get the vaccine and inform her former employer, she'd be back on the clock in no time.

---

It sounds like she might get the vaccine after having the baby... Or after breastfeeding ends...
---