Desdi

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/co...ons/ar-AARkA4D

“The United States is preparing to require all inbound international travelers to be tested for the coronavirus one day before departure, regardless of vaccination status, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said late Tuesday.

The Biden administration is also considering a requirement for a second test within three to five days of arrival, and possibly requiring travelers to quarantine for seven days — precautions that have been enacted in other countries but would be a first in the United States at the federal level.”

This will never end folks unless there is some pushback. Say goodbye to all of those rosy hiring numbers for next year, all for a kneejerk reaction.

Red Forman

At lest they admit that the post arrival test and quarantine isn’t enforceable. Flying to Mexico and walking across the border still seems to be the easiest way back into the country.

Excargodog

Because there is no COVID in the USA and we want to keep it out???

MongoC5

While this is beyond dumb… so they do a quick rapid test the day before vs a few days prior. Don’t they require that now anyways? Seems like a lot of chest thumping that will cause little impact.

Mongo

germanaviator

It really is ridiculous. COVID is everywhere and so is the latest variant. Any quarantine requirements would instantly kill the return of international tourism to the United States. Every pilot should write to their senators and representatives as well as to their union with their concerns.

DeltaboundRedux

So....flight crews returning from abroad will have to quarantine for 7 days now?

Presumably in the port of entry city? The hotel bills are going to be insane.

Unless flight crews are exempt. Because !SCIENCE!


-------------

This trial balloon is a real head scratcher.

Maybe something much worse is going on with "Omicron" and we're just being lied to (for our own good, of course. See: "Masks/No Masks/Masks everywhere we lied for your own good, peasants".

Or the extreme siloing of whatever government agency comes up with in their conference rooms coupled with a perception of total power just keeps ratcheting up the holiness spiral?

Maybe the fact that way more people are dying of Covid in the US under the current president (with "vaccines") than the previous president is going to enter the zeitgeist soon?

Beats me. To enact these rules in the face of what's called a "safe, effective vaccine" makes no sense.

Drum

DBR, You've thrown darts all around the bullseye. In that, you've gotten to the root cause.

The .gov has lied so many times, they don't know where they are at. They've wondered far off the trail and are lashing out in all directions desperately trying to find it again.

Judge Doughty in LA just nuked the back door CMS mandate. Yet medical firms and hospitals drive forward with their mandates. The illegal termination suits are going to be epic.

Moreover a fed judge just stated in his ruling that Corminaty and the Pfizer biotech EUA jab are distinct. This came from a DOD suit, inconsequential Save for this little nugget. So as I've been saying all along, the mandates are illegal since they are using the EUA drug still.

It's a mess. This is what happens when you let feelings, dogma, and a rabid portion of your base take over. We'll be digging out if this mess for decades.


And for those of you that are going to roll in with "a private business can do blah, blah, blah" you forget 2 things. 1. Individuals have rights, not businesses and 2. Test of reasonableness. Lots of businesses that elected to mandate this jab are going rue the day they took that step off the cliff.

Grumpyaviator

I was just in an area where there were no rapid tests, quickest turnaround was 24 hours. It was difficult getting in the window and only happened by a fluke.

Flying to MX and walking across was a serious consideration.

rickair7777

Not likely... it may end up illegal for .gov to mandate it in the manner they chose but it's still clearly legal for employers to do so. If the mandate gets overturned, then employers simply re-hire any terminated employees (who could always try to sue .gov for back pay). But if an employer (ex. UAL) actually WANTS to mandate vaccination they are still free to do so.


I do not subscribe to the "artificial person" concept of corporations, for the most part. A corporation needs "artificial person" status for the purpose of civil law. Period.

The idea of "charging" a corporation with "crimes" is beyond ridiculous... if a crime was committed a *real* person needs to be charged, because SOMEBODY (who is NOT artificial) made the call to commit a crime. The offense should not be diluted to fines paid by the company, otherwise there's not much serious incentive to obey the rules (like pro ballers who get fined $10K for grabbing their junk in the end zone).

In that vein, I think a business is a group of people and people DO have rights... specifically who you employ and under what circumstances, as limited by law. Also CBA's can and do codify those circumstances, so the obvious thing to do is negotiate protections from vaccine mandates going forward.

No they won't. They're legally on solid ground. If it causes too much of a staffing issue, they can always just back down... business decision, cost vs. benefit. AA seems to have reached a different conclusion that UA.

RI830

They are on solid legal ground as a private employer to mandate that. But capitalism reigns here....employees don't have to go back to staff up the place and patrons don't have to go spend their inflation bucks there.
A jab-woke employer may see themselves closing their business for their short sighted decisions. You reap what you sow!