Mandatory vaccines for teachers/staff and eligible students

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Okay but this has been going on a while now and where have we seen teachers unions advocating for mandatory vaccinations?

Where have we seen such demands from management? My understanding is that DCPS management has had no interest in mandates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With mandate coming for federal workers, I don’t see how teachers unions can keep any argument against mandatory vaccination or routine testing.

Ooo are they? That’ll be good.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

+1 this is important

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

Completely agree. WTU could ultimately choose to support or opposed a DCPS proposal for a vaccine mandate, but WTU has no power to authorize a mandate on its own. DCPS doesn't seem interested in mandating vaccines for teachers or students right now, so it seems to be pretty much a non-issue for the WTU.

[Anonymous]

It’s not moot because it is never too late to be vaccinated.

It should be vax or test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not moot because it is never too late to be vaccinated.

It should be vax or test.

True, but DCPS seems to be taking the third option - no required vaccine and no in school testing.

[Anonymous]

I can’t see how DC DoH can sit back while NYC, CA, and the federal government require vaccines. They should get their act together.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

This is true.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

So you’re placing all the blame on DCPS for not mandating the vaccine for children? What?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

So you’re placing all the blame on DCPS for not mandating the vaccine for children? What?

DCPS is the party responsible for any mandates. So far, I have not seen any indication that DCPS is interested in mandates for either students or teachers. The WTU has shown strong support for vaccines but has indicated that mandates should be negotiated. It has also stated that it is interested is solutions aimed not only at teachers, but also students. Therefore, the ball is clearly in the DCPS court. Do you believe differently?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AFT clearly says they don’t think vaccination should be “coerced” so I’m not sure how you can interpret that in any other way than that they will oppose it in negotiations. I am not sure if WTU shares AFT’s position but I would be surprised if they didn’t.

If the parties don’t reach agreement this is called an “impass” and that gets into issues of DC public employee labor law I cannot speak to. But it would obviously be a crazy turn of events if WTU went on strike to oppose mandatory vaccination.

Your last sentence gets to the heart of the issue. It would clearly be untenable for a teachers' union to strike in opposition to a mandatory vaccine. That's why the ATF's position is clearly to negotiate the best modalities that can obtained. If any union opposed a mandate in negotiations, management would just call their bluff.

So your final position is “WTU will never actually strike over this”?

I have not seen any indication that the WTU even opposes a mandate, let alone is prepared to strike over it.

Practically speaking, the Federal government will issue a vaccine mandate on Thursday. The Washington Post issued one today. There will probably be wave of other business requiring their employees to be vaccinated. It would be suicidal for the WTU to strike (not to mention that I don't think they can legally strike). If you listen and/or read the WTU statements, the Union's concern is safe schools. As such, vaccinations are the single most important factor and union leaders have been very vocal in supporting vaccinations. But, that goes for eligible students as well as teachers and staff. The union doesn't want its members singled out while unvaccinated teenagers fill classrooms and under-12s go home to unvaccinated parents. The union probably prefers an incentives-based approach to vaccinations over a mandate, but there is no sign that a mandate is the hill it wants to die on.

In my opinion, the issue is not the WTU, but DCPS. Is DCPS prepared to require vaccinations for eligible students? Very soon this is all going to be moot because there won't be time for anyone who is not vaccinated to get vaccinated before school starts.

I think the difference is K12 students are mostly minors and "clients", versus adults and paid employees. The whole business of mandating a vaccine that has not yet been fully approved is 'murky' anyway. Colleges who mostly deal with over 18 in a residential environment are venturing there, but I doubt public K12s will until the vaccine is FDA approved. With that being said, teachers--like health workers, first responders, essential workers etc should be required to be vaccinated. No one complained when they were bumped to the front of the line for eligibility (and with good reason). Their jobs are part of functioning society.

[Anonymous]

What would be the points of negotiation if DCPS did mandate a vaccine for DC employees, including teachers? The time frame? I doubt medical exemptions would be a point of contention, and I doubt religious ones would be either.