2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Meanwhile I just received a text from a GB his dad passed from Covid. Woke yesterday morning to a text from another GB that his mom passed from Covid. :(
Just hours after L.A. County Supervisor
@SheilaKuehl
voted to ban all outdoor dining last Tuesday, which she described as “a most dangerous situation”, we’ve learned that she dined outdoors at Il Forno Trattoria in Santa Monica
I admire his restraint for not including:McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
Once again the pro life party proves they only care about life right up until the point it’s born.McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
“China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!”Speaking of government response to the Covid19 - I don't think the Chinese government did the world any favors.
I believe in Woodward’s recordings Trump started talking about airborne transmission and how bad it was after a conversation with Xi yet didn’t tell the American public about it until much later.“China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!”
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
Thank god trump didnt proclaim it was airborne. Doctors would still be fighting against the possibility of it.I believe in Woodward’s recordings Trump started talking about airborne transmission and how bad it was after a conversation with Xi yet didn’t tell the American public about it until much later.
Rage by Woodward does a good job on explaining this.BroadwayG said:“China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank PresidentGr00vus said:Speaking of government response to the Covid19 - I don't think the Chinese government did the world any favors.
Along with Austin's genius mayor who took a private jet with a bunch of family, flew to Cabo, and then told everyone to stay home while he was in Cabo.Yeah. Leaders gotta lead. Pelosi going maskless in Salons. Cuomo telling people not to have family Thanksgiving, but trying to sneak in his own, this...
Hard to be a general if you won't do something you're asking the troops to do.
This is probably good though.McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
As a resident of the Dakotas, I'm pretty happy about Operation Warp Speed. The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job handling covid, but at least they managed to get vaccine development right, which is a really big deal. On the other hand, my state government has been nothing but actively harmful, and my local government hasn't exactly covered itself in glory either. I feel much more injured by my state/local leadership than by anybody at the federal level.We are all on our own - That has been the government response to COVID-19. Thousands die every day due to the federal government's complete abdication of leadership. We are left with a haphazard, localized, and politicized approach to addressing a pandemic where we still can't agree on something as simple and obvious as wearing masks. Community spread is everywhere. There is no containment possible. Hospitals are at capacity. We can only wait until a vaccine is available. What a disgrace.
Huh. That seems like a terrible idea to me. Seems like poor policy for employers to be allowed to tell me I have to show up in person (rather than work from home), provide an unsafe work environment (refuse to enforce a mask mandate and other mitigation strategies), and refuse to perform appropriate contact tracing in the event of an outbreak, then shield them from lawsuits if those policies lead to me getting sick.This is probably good though.McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
Well, that's the rub right? I haven't seen the text. Personally, I have no issue with a liability shield for any company who's followed guidelines for what qualifies as doing their best to keep people safe. There are problems with this though. The primary one being our "guidelines" are severely lacking in the consistency and clearness department. I think companies doing as you describe here should be fully subjected to legal action. However, I do believe companies/businesses who are doing everything they can to mitigate should be protected as well. So in my view, if it's just blanket protection (which is what's been suggested as the case....I don't know for sure) it's absolutely not a good idea. If there are criteria and guidelines, then maybe not such a bad idea.Huh. That seems like a terrible idea to me. Seems like poor policy for employers to be allowed to tell me I have to show up in person (rather than work from home), provide an unsafe work environment (refuse to enforce a mask mandate and other mitigation strategies), and refuse to perform appropriate contact tracing in the event of an outbreak, then shield them from lawsuits if those policies lead to me getting sick.This is probably good though.McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
I'm not sure what philosophical ground there is for blaming employers for following the same policies put forward by government policymakers. It would be one thing if we had a mask mandate, contact tracing, and required WFH. But we haven't done that.Huh. That seems like a terrible idea to me. Seems like poor policy for employers to be allowed to tell me I have to show up in person (rather than work from home), provide an unsafe work environment (refuse to enforce a mask mandate and other mitigation strategies), and refuse to perform appropriate contact tracing in the event of an outbreak, then shield them from lawsuits if those policies lead to me getting sick.
Exactly, it gives businesses too much power over the employees. Much of the precautions businesses have put in have been for CYA purposes in case they may be open to liability or being shutdown. Working in retail this entire pandemic, I’ve already seen a lot of those precautions breakdown.Huh. That seems like a terrible idea to me. Seems like poor policy for employers to be allowed to tell me I have to show up in person (rather than work from home), provide an unsafe work environment (refuse to enforce a mask mandate and other mitigation strategies), and refuse to perform appropriate contact tracing in the event of an outbreak, then shield them from lawsuits if those policies lead to me getting sick.
If we're talking about a civil lawsuit, I think the standard is "preponderance of evidence". I don't see why we would should create a blanket shield that forbids me from even attempting to come up with a preponderance. For example, if I literally never leave my house other than to go work in a retail environment, in which the employer refuses to provide some pretty basic mitigation such as require masks, I don't think it's a stretch to call that a preponderance of evidence (i.e. more likely than not) that I got sick at work.I'm not sure what philosophical ground there is for blaming employers for following the same policies put forward by government policymakers. It would be one thing if we had a mask mandate, contact tracing, and required WFH. But we haven't done that.
And of course, there's also the issue of how you're supposed to demonstrate that you got sick because your employer didn't do contact tracing (not sure why this is an employer thing, but we'll run with it) as opposed to you catching the virus from a trip to the grocery store, gas station, or some other normal part of living your life.
I think it's pretty obviously a bad idea to retroactively hold employers financially accountable for failing to do things that they pointedly weren't required to do, especially when there's no good way to demonstrate that those actions caused harm to any particular individual. And that's just employers. Things get even hairier when you get to schools and hospitals.
Because it's nearly impossible for anyone to meet that standard during a global pandemic, and the cost of defending against baseless lawsuits isn't worth it.If we're talking about a civil lawsuit, I think the standard is "preponderance of evidence". I don't see why we would should create a blanket shield that forbids me from even attempting to come up with a preponderance.
Do you think the risk of baseless lawsuits outweighs the risk of legitimate claims where employers put their employees in unsafe conditions?Because it's nearly impossible for anyone to meet that standard during a global pandemic, and the cost of defending against baseless lawsuits isn't worth it.
Yes. There are about 14.3 million people who could theoretically sue their employer under @Rich Conway's reasoning. Most of those employers muddled their way through epidemic, just like our local, state, and federal policymakers did. Generally, I think we should give folks fairly broad latitude for how they handled a once-in-a-lifetime situation, especially when they were more or less taking their cues from elected leaders.Do you think the risk of baseless lawsuits outweighs the risk of legitimate claims where employers put their employees in unsafe conditions?
I don't disagree with that, but there are certainly cases where poor outcomes were likely the direct result of decisions taken by employers. Those that create unsafe working conditions should have some consequences.Yes. There are about 14.3 million people who could theoretically sue their employer under @Rich Conway's reasoning. Most of those employers muddled their way through epidemic, just like our local, state, and federal policymakers did. Generally, I think we should give folks fairly broad latitude for how they handled a once-in-a-lifetime situation, especially when they were more or less taking their cues from elected leaders.
Complex problem to be sure. Then you have organizations like Tyson were managers were forcing unsafe conditions and making pool bets on how many infections their employees got.I'm not sure what philosophical ground there is for blaming employers for following the same policies put forward by government policymakers. It would be one thing if we had a mask mandate, contact tracing, and required WFH. But we haven't done that.
And of course, there's also the issue of how you're supposed to demonstrate that you got sick because your employer didn't do contact tracing (not sure why this is an employer thing, but we'll run with it) as opposed to you catching the virus from a trip to the grocery store, gas station, or some other normal part of living your life.
I think it's pretty obviously a bad idea to retroactively hold employers financially accountable for failing to do things that they pointedly weren't required to do, especially when there's no good way to demonstrate that those actions caused harm to any particular individual. And that's just employers. Things get even hairier when you get to schools and hospitals.
Where did the opinion that low wage people are unable to protect themselves at the workplace come from? This is just garbage. I work at a facility that runs the spectrum, high wage salaried, lower wage hourly..and everyone has protocols they need to follow. There isn't a policy that is implemented for the salaried and not the hourly.Complex problem to be sure. Then you have organizations like Tyson were managers were forcing unsafe conditions and making pool bets on how many infections their employees got.
The average footballguy probably has considerable more ability to defend themselves than a lot of low wage workers in the United States. Especially galls me that these are the people who in fact shouldered a lot of the work place risks and employers get to get off scot free. I don't know the details of the bill but I have a sneaking feeling if McConnell's people are are writing it then it skews pretty heavily towards industry/employers.
We are asking employees to risk everything they have, at low wages with no opportunity to seek damages? I dunno mang.
I think it was more referring to white color workers allowed to work from home, while those low-paid hourly workers are forced to be on the line, cutting up chickens, etc.Where did the opinion that low wage people are unable to protect themselves at the workplace come from? This is just garbage. I work at a facility that runs the spectrum, high wage salaried, lower wage hourly..and everyone has protocols they need to follow. There isn't a policy that is implemented for the salaried and not the hourly.
Yeah the Tyson example you mentioned(no way to know if it is true, but we will say it is) is certainly a bad situation, but let's not automatically assume that because someone is "low wage" it means they cannot protect themsevles the same as the non low wage. Masks---social distancing---2 top items to comply with. Wage has nothing to do with this concept.
Ugh
I disagree. My wife’s hometown just opened schools the week before Thanksgiving and had 24 cases of Covid. (20 students and 4 teachers). One of the teachers is fighting for her life. All because a vocal minority of parents pressures the district to reopen against the teachers’ wishes. Why should we shield employers from recklessly endangering their employees lives?This is probably good thoughMcConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
I see the void of leadership, and outright undermining of the scientific community, at the federal level as the primary driver behind state and local governments being "actively harmful". The lack of clear messaging at the federal level has fostered an environment of mixed messages, amateur theories, and outright falsehoods locally.As a resident of the Dakotas, I'm pretty happy about Operation Warp Speed. The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job handling covid, but at least they managed to get vaccine development right, which is a really big deal. On the other hand, my state government has been nothing but actively harmful, and my local government hasn't exactly covered itself in glory either. I feel much more injured by my state/local leadership than by anybody at the federal level.
Same goes for the Tyson plant in Iowa. Should these guys really be shielded from liability?I disagree. My wife’s hometown just opened schools the week before Thanksgiving and had 24 cases of Covid. (20 students and 4 teachers). One of the teachers is fighting for her life. All because a vocal minority of parents pressures the district to reopen against the teachers’ wishes. Why should we shield employers from recklessly endangering their employees lives?
OWS seems like a mixed bag. Pfizer took no development money, though having a $2Bn preorder with the US government I your pocket seems like a sufficient motivator for a cash laden behemoth. Moderna def would not have gotten there without the $1Bn they took. But they’re nowhere near hitting the target of 300M manufactures doses by the end of January; they’ll have to pull out all stops to have 20M.As a resident of the Dakotas, I'm pretty happy about Operation Warp Speed. The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job handling covid, but at least they managed to get vaccine development right, which is a really big deal. On the other hand, my state government has been nothing but actively harmful, and my local government hasn't exactly covered itself in glory either. I feel much more injured by my state/local leadership than by anybody at the federal level.
There is no rock bottom with this man. He’s like an infinite abyss.Meanwhile the President is RTing a post saying a COVID hospital set up in Nevada is fake. He fails every basic test of true leadership.
Anybody can theoretically sue anybody for anything. These suits would be extremely difficult to win for the reasons you have stated, and therefore my suspicion is only a tiny fraction of those 14.3 million people would bring such a suit. These sorts of cases are typically brought by lawyers operating under contingency fees so anyone with a lousy case wouldn't even be able to find a lawyer to represent him. What makes you think that there would be a deluge of frivolous lawsuits? My expectation is that there would be some frivolous lawsuits mixed in with some meritorious lawsuits, like pretty much every situation in which we hold employers to a reasonable standard of care for their employees.Yes. There are about 14.3 million people who could theoretically sue their employer under @Rich Conway's reasoning.
I also think that employers are less likely to protect low-wage workers because unemployment numbers make replacing them much easier. The fear of litigation keeps them honest. Give them blanket immunity and what’s stopping them from changing their policies and telling employees, if you don’t like it, we’ll find someone who does.I think it was more referring to white color workers allowed to work from home, while those low-paid hourly workers are forced to be on the line, cutting up chickens, etc.
I fall into the former category, but there are lots of my colleagues that fall into the latter one (assembling widgets, not cutting up chickens).
This post could have been made by any teacher anywhere in the country that has in-person instruction, and I think it belongs in the "frivolous" category. Opening up K-12 schools was probably the right move, and it certainly wasn't obviously the wrong move in a way that would amount to recklessness.Anybody can theoretically sue anybody for anything. These suits would be extremely difficult to win for the reasons you have stated, and therefore my suspicion is only a tiny fraction of those 14.3 million people would bring such a suit. These sorts of cases are typically brought by lawyers operating under contingency fees so anyone with a lousy case wouldn't even be able to find a lawyer to represent him. What makes you think that there would be a deluge of frivolous lawsuits? My expectation is that there would be some frivolous lawsuits mixed in with some meritorious lawsuits, like pretty much every situation in which we hold employers to a reasonable standard of care for their employees.
Have any of those teachers brought a lawsuit yet? Congress hasn't passed liability protection yet so it seems like they could. But I haven't heard of any such cases.This post could have been made by any teacher anywhere in the country that has in-person instruction, and I think it belongs in the "frivolous" category. Opening up K-12 schools was probably the right move, and it certainly wasn't obviously the wrong move in a way that would amount to recklessness.
No. But yes. Otherwise we will be plagued for years with litigation.Same goes for the Tyson plant in Iowa. Should these guys really be shielded from liability?
That's fair.I guess just to cut to the chase, I don't believe that Republicans seek liability protection to prevent frivolous lawsuits against corporations. They want it to prevent meritorious lawsuits against corporations.
I’m actually coming from the same place, which is why I think that the number of lawsuits will be manageable. But the lawsuit linked above against Tyson Foods seems to have a lot of merit and should have its day in court.That's fair.
I'm sure you picked up on this, but I'm coming from the starting point of assuming that most employers have acted reasonably during the pandemic, and that they're mostly not to blame (in a way that we would want to be legally actionable) for harm befalling their employees.
But how is that different than virtually every other transaction, for which we don't create blanket shields for one side of the transaction? Most people act reasonably. The ones that don't get sued.That's fair.
I'm sure you picked up on this, but I'm coming from the starting point of assuming that most employers have acted reasonably during the pandemic, and that they're mostly not to blame (in a way that we would want to be legally actionable) for harm befalling their employees.
Why? It's a ####show here too...btw, didn't know you lived here? What part?So L.A. is now going on full lockdown and "cancelling everything". So glad I live in Florida.
Our union and district were actually pretty smart about this (though I don’t think it was their intention). Multiple times leading up to and during the return to face to face school, they polled teachers about they felt about it. Options were something likeThis post could have been made by any teacher anywhere in the country that has in-person instruction, and I think it belongs in the "frivolous" category. Opening up K-12 schools was probably the right move, and it certainly wasn't obviously the wrong move in a way that would amount to recklessness.