Major Airline Faces DISASTER as Vax Mandate Begins

[rangerrebew]

Major Airline Faces DISASTER as Vax Mandate Begins
By
Paul Duke -
October 11, 2021
 
Around the nation, an increasing number of private companies are moving toward mandating vaccines for their employees in a move that could alienate vast numbers of the workforce.

You see, Americans are still not entirely sure about receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.  Some state concerns over the long-term efficacy of the relatively new inoculations, while others fear that the speed in which these jabs were developed belies cut corners and potential carelessness.

And so, as corporations continue to attempt to require vaccinations, employees are leaving in droves.

This weekend, Southwest Airlines was forced to cancel nearly a third of all of their flights, blaming staff shortages, among other factors.

https://steadfastdaily.com/major-airline-faces-disaster-as-vax-mandate-begins/

[IsailedawayfromFR]

SWA made their reputation out of making their employees and their customers happy.

They managed spectacularly to erase that image within one week.

[Smokin Joe]

No mention of the fact that IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG when you get the shot, THE MANUFACTURERS HAVE ZERO LIABILITY.

Whatta deal.

Sell a product, have people mandate it (more sales), and if it works out badly for the consumers, they can't sue you!

At least there won't be those late night commercials....

If you or a loved one suffered serious injury or death and took the ...

[IsailedawayfromFR]

No mention of the fact that IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG when you get the shot, THE MANUFACTURERS HAVE ZERO LIABILITY.

Whatta deal.

Sell a product, have people mandate it (more sales), and if it works out badly for the consumers, they can't sue you!

At least there won't be those late night commercials....

If you or a loved one suffered serious injury or death and took the ...

The pharmaceuticals have one-upped the trial lawyers

[Kamaji]

Injuries from vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccinations, are covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Board and the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program:  https://www.hrsa.gov/cicp

The traditional torts legal system is seriously broken in many instances, and becomes nothing more than a spectacular lottery for certain individuals and their lawyers.

[Smokin Joe]

Injuries from vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccinations, are covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Board and the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program:  https://www.hrsa.gov/cicp

The traditional torts legal system is seriously broken in many instances, and becomes nothing more than a spectacular lottery for certain individuals and their lawyers.

Right.

You were out of work because of COVID. You got the shot. Bad result? Wages? zero...what compensation?

[Kamaji]

Right.

You were out of work because of COVID. You got the shot. Bad result? Wages? zero...what compensation?

That's not because of the vaccine.  You'd get fined for a frivolous lawsuit if you sued a pharma company for that.

[Wingnut]

Right.

You were out of work because of COVID. You got the shot. Bad result? Wages? zero...what compensation?

Better have AFLAC

[Smokin Joe]

That's not because of the vaccine.  You'd get fined for a frivolous lawsuit if you sued a pharma company for that.

You missed my point. "You got the shot. Bad result"

The bad result would be because of the vaccine.

But because you had been out of work, compensation would be limited, if even forthcoming. Your demonstrated earnings in the period prior to getting and having an adverse reaction to the shot would be measured at the lowest compensation levels you have received in your working life, because you were out of work. The devil's in the guidelines.

That nonexistent "earnings potential" would limit the compensation package as a matter of policy because you were unemployed, and possibly had been for some time..   

[Kamaji]

You missed my point. "You got the shot. Bad result"

The bad result would be because of the vaccine.

But because you had been out of work, compensation would be limited, if even forthcoming. Your demonstrated earnings in the period prior to getting and having an adverse reaction to the shot would be measured at the lowest compensation levels you have received in your working life, because you were out of work. The devil's in the guidelines.

That nonexistent "earnings potential" would limit the compensation package as a matter of policy because you were unemployed, and possibly had been for some time..   

Tough shit.  Sue your employer for that.  Tort liability was never intended to be the open-ended lottery ticket it's turned into.

There are very good reasons why the pharma companies were given general immunity from suit for vaccine injuries, and why compensation for those injuries was put under the vaccine injury board.  If one bothered to look into the history of it, one would see why.

Given the degree of regulation vaccine producers are subject to, this immunity is not a license to print money nor to engage in moral hazard.

The tort liability system in this country is, in general, all bleep to hell and gone - it's more or less nothing more than a payola system for well-placed trial lawyers and the democrat politicians they pay for - it's no longer primarily about recompensing people for the direct, actual injuries they may have sustained from someone else's improper conduct.

[Smokin Joe]

Tough shit.  Sue your employer for that.  Tort liability was never intended to be the open-ended lottery ticket it's turned into.

There are very good reasons why the pharma companies were given general immunity from suit for vaccine injuries, and why compensation for those injuries was put under the vaccine injury board.  If one bothered to look into the history of it, one would see why.

Given the degree of regulation vaccine producers are subject to, this immunity is not a license to print money nor to engage in moral hazard.

The tort liability system in this country is, in general, all bleep to hell and gone - it's more or less nothing more than a payola system for well-placed trial lawyers and the democrat politicians they pay for - it's no longer primarily about recompensing people for the direct, actual injuries they may have sustained from someone else's improper conduct.

What employer? The hypothetical person in my post was unemployed.

There is a liability waiver for the vaccines. NO manufacturer liability for a product that not only may, but has caused harm.

If you want that shot under those terms, be my guest.

I'm not going to take it, so for me, that will be a non-issue anyway.

As for any government compensation system, I was merely trying to illustrate how that will work. If you get the shot and you have an adverse effect, you're screwed, because your "compensation" will likely be based on what you earned while you were unemployed, not what you made while you had a job before all this started. In short, bupkis!

Sure, the tort system is screwed, no argument there, but it won't be involved in this mess over adverse reactions.

The only people open to suit, in the instance of adverse effects, will be those who required the shot as a condition of continued employment, not the people who made the injected material. It is likely they will hide behind any government requirement which mandated that course of action.

So any risk incurred over adverse effects falls on the patient, and they (or their survivors) won't get shit.

[Kamaji]

What employer? The hypothetical person in my post was unemployed.

There is a liability waiver for the vaccines. NO manufacturer liability for a product that not only may, but has caused harm.

If you want that shot under those terms, be my guest.

I'm not going to take it, so for me, that will be a non-issue anyway.

As for any government compensation system, I was merely trying to illustrate how that will work. If you get the shot and you have an adverse effect, you're screwed, because your "compensation" will likely be based on what you earned while you were unemployed, not what you made while you had a job before all this started. In short, bupkis!

Sure, the tort system is screwed, no argument there, but it won't be involved in this mess over adverse reactions.

The only people open to suit, in the instance of adverse effects, will be those who required the shot as a condition of continued employment, not the people who made the injected material. It is likely they will hide behind any government requirement which mandated that course of action.

So any risk incurred over adverse effects falls on the patient, and they (or their survivors) won't get shit.

Do you even understand how the vaccine injury compensation program works?

Assume your facts:  an unemployed person receives a vaccine, and suffers injury thereby.  If the vaccine is one to which the program applies, then if the claim is substantiated, the injured person may receive as damages medical and legal expenses, loss of future earning capacity, and up to $250,000 for pain and suffering; a death benefit of up to $250,000 is available.  Source:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compensation_Program

So, in your case, if the unemployed person can substantiate their claim, then they will be entitled to medical and legal expenses, and if they can show that they have lost at least some future earning capacity due to the injury, they will be awarded compensation for lost earning capacity as well.  They can also get some reasonable compensation for pain and suffering.

Your conclusions are therefore completely wrong.  Just because a person is unemployed does not mean that they will not be compensated for a vaccine-caused injury.

The program itself is funded via an excise tax of 75 cents on every purchased dose of covered vaccine.

[Smokin Joe]

Do you even understand how the vaccine injury compensation program works?

Assume your facts:  an unemployed person receives a vaccine, and suffers injury thereby.  If the vaccine is one to which the program applies, then if the claim is substantiated, the injured person may receive as damages medical and legal expenses, loss of future earning capacity, and up to $250,000 for pain and suffering; a death benefit of up to $250,000 is available.  Source:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compensation_Program

So, in your case, if the unemployed person can substantiate their claim, then they will be entitled to medical and legal expenses, and if they can show that they have lost at least some future earning capacity due to the injury, they will be awarded compensation for lost earning capacity as well.  They can also get some reasonable compensation for pain and suffering.

Your conclusions are therefore completely wrong.  Just because a person is unemployed does not mean that they will not be compensated for a vaccine-caused injury.

The program itself is funded via an excise tax of 75 cents on every purchased dose of covered vaccine.

So what will be the basis for determining "future earnings" and lost earning capacity, if not past earnings?

"at lease some"?  Pardon the Hell out of me for being skeptical of any government run compensation program.

But like I said, It will not apply to me, because I'm not going to take the shots.

[Kamaji]

So what will be the basis for determining "future earnings" and lost earning capacity, if not past earnings?

"at lease some"?  Pardon the Hell out of me for being skeptical of any government run compensation program.

But like I said, It will not apply to me, because I'm not going to take the shots.

Past earnings is not determinative of future earnings capacity.  Period.

[Smokin Joe]

Past earnings is not determinative of future earnings capacity.  Period.

No, it isn't.

Believe me, after 40+ years of surviving the boom bust cycles of the oil industry, I am well aware of that.

But go ahead and tell me that someone either unemployed or in a $15/hour job has six figure income potential.
I have done that, gone from a $16/hour job to $150K in one year, but without a track record for that, or a past record for that sort of income, try to argue that likelihood in court as serious income potential.  Might as well be an 'aspiring rapper'...