“Reasonable Accommodation”
10-10-2021 | 08:36 AM
#181
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Right now there isn’t. At least with us, it’s the the accommodation of unpaid leave, suspended until the ruling.
I don’t think they’ll say yes to LTD either, I just think those folks probably have a legitimate claim and may actually be successful in fighting it given the terms. I mean realistically, if it’s legit, why shouldn’t they be given it? It’s different if it’s conspiracy driven, but if you really can’t, sure seems valid to me.
I don’t think they’ll say yes to LTD either, I just think those folks probably have a legitimate claim and may actually be successful in fighting it given the terms. I mean realistically, if it’s legit, why shouldn’t they be given it? It’s different if it’s conspiracy driven, but if you really can’t, sure seems valid to me.
That should be very easy to fight, if it even came to that.
10-10-2021 | 08:42 AM
#182
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,637
Likes: 212
I’m just referring to UA’s specific case. I have no idea what other companies are doing. At the moment we are not allowing for exemptions, just accommodations in the form of unpaid leave.
10-11-2021 | 08:17 PM
#184
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
- Aviation & airlines
- Federal employees & contractors
If you want to over-rule the federal executive, you need the federal courts, not locals.
To me it seems that the fed might not have solid grounds to mandate vaccination for all employees of a federal contractor carte blanche, but rather only those employees who actually do federal work or are exposed to federal persons. That would include all cabin crew obviously, and quite possibly pilots who are locked in the same tube with DTS-ticketed federal travelers but I don't see what it has to do with mechanics, call-center agents, rampers, etc. who have no contact with federal pax.
10-11-2021 | 11:23 PM
#186
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,637
Likes: 212
No. Fed supersedes states on some things, and two very clearly established examples of those things are...
- Aviation & airlines
- Federal employees & contractors
If you want to over-rule the federal executive, you need the federal courts, not locals.
To me it seems that the fed might not have solid grounds to mandate vaccination for all employees of a federal contractor carte blanche, but rather only those employees who actually do federal work or are exposed to federal persons. That would include all cabin crew obviously, and quite possibly pilots who are locked in the same tube with DTS-ticketed federal travelers but I don't see what it has to do with mechanics, call-center agents, rampers, etc. who have no contact with federal pax.
- Aviation & airlines
- Federal employees & contractors
If you want to over-rule the federal executive, you need the federal courts, not locals.
To me it seems that the fed might not have solid grounds to mandate vaccination for all employees of a federal contractor carte blanche, but rather only those employees who actually do federal work or are exposed to federal persons. That would include all cabin crew obviously, and quite possibly pilots who are locked in the same tube with DTS-ticketed federal travelers but I don't see what it has to do with mechanics, call-center agents, rampers, etc. who have no contact with federal pax.
Although, I’m sure there are very few companies who would not comply if the government were to give the contractual notice to an amendment requiring it.
10-12-2021 | 08:10 AM
#187
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
On that note, the current contractor-focused EO on vaccinations applies to new contracts. I’m not sure how often the are revised, so mandates external to the companies themselves may get a stay until the next contract revision.
Although, I’m sure there are very few companies who would not comply if the government were to give the contractual notice to an amendment requiring it.
Although, I’m sure there are very few companies who would not comply if the government were to give the contractual notice to an amendment requiring it.
Employees (or any other third party) are not going to be able to contest the contracts their employers have with the federal government, they have no standing. That would probably get tossed out in five minutes. Only the company holding the contract can do that.
10-12-2021 | 09:44 AM
#189
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
10-12-2021 | 11:49 AM
#190
Speed, Power, Accuracy
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 9
From: PIC
"Given the legal uncertainties regarding pending vaccine mandates, we have elected to postpone enforcement of the mandate until the legal issues are clarified."
