Schools with positive cases thread - post here

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t accept it because you are legally and factually wrong.

In what way? You said that saying mandates were subject to mandatory bargaining was an effort by the WTU to opposed mandates. I said the WTU did want to negotiate would would bargain in good faith. Ultimately, the WTU negotiated in good faith and agreed to a mandate. If that means I am wrong, I would like to be wrong more often.

There is no vaccine mandate on teachers. You know this. Everyone knows this. There are vaccine mandates on DC health care workers and firefighters and paramedics and lots of other public employees, but not teachers. It's why the city council is asking Bowser to expand that same mandate to teachers. You can read about it here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-covid-vaccine-mandate-teachers-child-care/2021/08/24/d84dc2aa-050b-11ec-a654-900a78538242_story.html

There is a mandate. It might not be as strict as you want, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I agree with the Council members that the exemptions should be removed.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can’t accept it because you are legally and factually wrong.

In what way? You said that saying mandates were subject to mandatory bargaining was an effort by the WTU to opposed mandates. I said the WTU did want to negotiate would would bargain in good faith. Ultimately, the WTU negotiated in good faith and agreed to a mandate. If that means I am wrong, I would like to be wrong more often.

There is no vaccine mandate on teachers. You know this. Everyone knows this. There are vaccine mandates on DC health care workers and firefighters and paramedics and lots of other public employees, but not teachers. It's why the city council is asking Bowser to expand that same mandate to teachers. You can read about it here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-covid-vaccine-mandate-teachers-child-care/2021/08/24/d84dc2aa-050b-11ec-a654-900a78538242_story.html

There is a mandate. It might not be as strict as you want, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I agree with the Council members that the exemptions should be removed.

Heh. It's a mandate to get vaccinated, except no one actually has to get vaccinated. You can just do some phony baloney periodic testing or claim some phony baloney medical exemption.

You should talk to DC firefighters. They are subject to a real vaccine mandate, and they think teachers are getting away with murder.

[Anonymous]

I am amazed that there are adults who are big enough assholes to show up in schools unvaccinated when they know that many, if not all, of the children around them cannot be vaccinated.

I am even more amazed that such behavior would be condoned by the DC government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am amazed that there are adults who are big enough assholes to show up in schools unvaccinated when they know that many, if not all, of the children around them cannot be vaccinated.

I am even more amazed that such behavior would be condoned by the DC government.

As a vaccinated teacher in an elementary school I am amazed that anyone surrounded by an unvaccinated population would risk getting COVID instead of getting a vaccine. You say assholes, I say idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am amazed that there are adults who are big enough assholes to show up in schools unvaccinated when they know that many, if not all, of the children around them cannot be vaccinated.

I am even more amazed that such behavior would be condoned by the DC government.

As a vaccinated teacher in an elementary school I am amazed that anyone surrounded by an unvaccinated population would risk getting COVID instead of getting a vaccine. You say assholes, I say idiots.

Hear hear. This!!

[Anonymous]

A mandate does not allow for a testing option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A mandate does not allow for a testing option.

Your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!”

Jeff: “Yes, it does. The mandatory bargaining that DCPS engaged in resulted in a vaccine mandate.”

Poster 1: “You don’t know what “mandate” means!! mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Jeff: “There are two things here: mandatory bargaining and the vaccine mandate. Stop confusing them. On mandatory bargaining, we agree.”

Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Jeff: “Yes. We agree. But I’m talking about the mandate.”

Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Everyone else: wtf, poster 1??

lol, no. Jeff’s consistent mistake is that he thinks a union pressing for “mandatory bargaining” over a workplace condition means they are in favor of that condition. when in practice it generally means the opposite - they are using their power to obstruct or slow down the imposition of that workplace condition. Basic labor law. This all arose because posters were pointing out that teachers unions (AFT) were hypocritical on school covid safety because they weren’t pushing vaccine mandates, and Jeff said, “yes they support vaccines - they want mandatory bargaining over it!” But invoking mandatory bargaining generally means the opposite - they are going to resist or limit it. And indeed the vaccine “mandates” that emerged from that bargaining were not actually mandates … i instead the unions were able to protect their anti-vax members.

(and let’s not even get into whether vaccines actually are a subject of mandatory bargaining! as another PP pointed out, we don’t even know if they are, legally. But it seems like DCPS treated them that way.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A mandate does not allow for a testing option.

Your point?

DP. That DCPS does not actually have a vaccine mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!”

Jeff: “Yes, it does. The mandatory bargaining that DCPS engaged in resulted in a vaccine mandate.”

Poster 1: “You don’t know what “mandate” means!! mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Jeff: “There are two things here: mandatory bargaining and the vaccine mandate. Stop confusing them. On mandatory bargaining, we agree.”

Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Jeff: “Yes. We agree. But I’m talking about the mandate.”

Poster 1: “mandatory bargaining has a legal meaning!!!

Everyone else: wtf, poster 1??

lol, no. Jeff’s consistent mistake is that he thinks a union pressing for “mandatory bargaining” over a workplace condition means they are in favor of that condition. when in practice it generally means the opposite - they are using their power to obstruct or slow down the imposition of that workplace condition. Basic labor law. This all arose because posters were pointing out that teachers unions (AFT) were hypocritical on school covid safety because they weren’t pushing vaccine mandates, and Jeff said, “yes they support vaccines - they want mandatory bargaining over it!” But invoking mandatory bargaining generally means the opposite - they are going to resist or limit it. And indeed the vaccine “mandates” that emerged from that bargaining were not actually mandates … i instead the unions were able to protect their anti-vax members.

(and let’s not even get into whether vaccines actually are a subject of mandatory bargaining! as another PP pointed out, we don’t even know if they are, legally. But it seems like DCPS treated them that way.)

Well another basic mistake is assuming that because they aren’t vocally against it that they must be for it.

[jsteele]

https://dcist.com/story/21/08/10/dc-requiring-government-workers-get-covid-19-vaccine/

The posters above think this represents opposition to a mandate:

Jacqueline Pogue Lyons, president of the local union, which represents about 5,000 educators in D.C. Public Schools, said she wants a vaccine requirement for teachers. Educators who receive a formal exemption from the vaccine for medical or religious reasons should be tested for the coronavirus weekly, she added. Lyons said about 90% of teachers represented by the union are vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:https://dcist.com/story/21/08/10/dc-requiring-government-workers-get-covid-19-vaccine/

The posters above think this represents opposition to a mandate:

Jacqueline Pogue Lyons, president of the local union, which represents about 5,000 educators in D.C. Public Schools, said she wants a vaccine requirement for teachers. Educators who receive a formal exemption from the vaccine for medical or religious reasons should be tested for the coronavirus weekly, she added. Lyons said about 90% of teachers represented by the union are vaccinated.

Jeff, that is not a mandate. they didn’t even bargain for a mandate. They used their bargaining power to get a non-mandate (vax or test). the overall point is that WTU (and the other DCPS staff unions) NEVER put their shoulder behind the single most effective covid measure (vaccinating all adults).

[Anonymous]

No: everyone else: who cares can we please get back to the subject of the thread?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:https://dcist.com/story/21/08/10/dc-requiring-government-workers-get-covid-19-vaccine/

The posters above think this represents opposition to a mandate:

Jacqueline Pogue Lyons, president of the local union, which represents about 5,000 educators in D.C. Public Schools, said she wants a vaccine requirement for teachers. Educators who receive a formal exemption from the vaccine for medical or religious reasons should be tested for the coronavirus weekly, she added. Lyons said about 90% of teachers represented by the union are vaccinated.

Jeff, that is not a mandate. they didn’t even bargain for a mandate. They used their bargaining power to get a non-mandate (vax or test). the overall point is that WTU (and the other DCPS staff unions) NEVER put their shoulder behind the single most effective covid measure (vaccinating all adults).

It was the same mandate that Biden had implemented for the Federal government just days before. The same as most other cities that implemented mandates. Mandates without medical or religious exemptions would likely be challenged in court. If the mandates get TRO'd, there would be even less than we have now. Also, this mandate applied to other DC workers so it had to take non-teachers into account. The Bowser administration and the unions (not just the WTU) got the strongest deal they could get.

[Anonymous]

At the time perhaps, but now is the time to move forward with a no-opt out system, such as will be implemented in the federal government. In addition the vaccine now has full FDA approval. Also, the case numbers are showing that unvaccinated adults are the primary risk in schools
These are not necessary teachers, but cafeteria workers, office personnel, cleaners, etc. The failure to move swiftly on the no opt out vaccine mandate is yet another major failure of the Bowser administration after an 18-month closure of schools.