Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

 

2011-03-31 04:37:17
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03 … z1HziKuYj2

"While both sides acknowledge it is only a matter of time until a legal challenge to the regulations is filed, Feldblum believes they will provide courts with plenty of clarity. She's also urging employers to stop focusing on defining disability, and spend more time on accommodations.
"I am hopeful that employers will now move to the next question which is, 'How do we make sure our workplace is welcoming to people with a range of health conditions?'" she told Fox News. "


Even though the criteria for disability have changed to something quite liberal, I don't see anyone trying to take advantage of it.......DO you?!!



Because according to liberals, the company is in business to provide you with a good living and take care of you, it is NOT supposed to be in business to make money.

Last edited by lowing (2011-03-31 04:39:16)

2011-03-31 05:11:00
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6365|eXtreme to the maX
Fox News.... Liberals..... Lawyers....

Hey I know, why doesn't America open its doors to Chinese aircraft mechanics?
I'm sure they're cheaper and work harder.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-03-31 05:11:56)

Fuck Israel
2011-03-31 05:35:47
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Fox News.... Liberals..... Lawyers....

Hey I know, why doesn't America open its doors to Chinese aircraft mechanics?
I'm sure they're cheaper and work harder.
Not a problem Dilbert, I will just go find another job.


Now you got that off your chest, address the article.
2011-03-31 05:38:54
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6258|...
"some say" problem right there - its bullshit to sway opinion. "A major life activity" has to fall within the work you do at your job, 99% of the time not the case, especially if you yourself don't even know your disability.

Last edited by Shocking (2011-03-31 05:41:22)

inane little opines
2011-03-31 05:44:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Shocking wrote:

"some say" problem right there - its bullshit to sway opinion. "A major life activity" has to fall within the work you do at your job, 99% of the time not the case, especially if you yourself don't even know your disability.
according to the article, the burden of proof will now switch from the employee PROVING they are disabled to the employer PROVING they are not.

I definitely see this happening, and do not doubt for 1 second, that this new criteria will be abused HUGE.
2011-03-31 05:46:57
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6258|...
Huh? that wouldn't make sense, everyone has a medical file which lists their supposed disabilities. It's not up to the company to retrieve that but the employee, when he's saying "I have major learning disabilities" a company can't fetch his medical file for him.

Last edited by Shocking (2011-03-31 05:49:50)

inane little opines
2011-03-31 05:50:11
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Shocking wrote:

Huh? that wouldn't make sense, everyone has a medical file which lists their supposed disabilities. It's not up to the company to retrieve that but the employee, when he's saying "I have major learning disabilities" a company can't fetch his medical file for him.
read the article
2011-03-31 05:53:12
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6258|...
But how is the employer going to prove that? I can't get your medical file because I'm not you, or is the employer supposed to pay the cost of retrieving it?
inane little opines
2011-03-31 06:06:49
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Shocking wrote:

But how is the employer going to prove that? I can't get your medical file because I'm not you, or is the employer supposed to pay the cost of retrieving it?
it is called lawsuit. Watch what happens when an employee tells his employer that he can not do the job because he suffers from PTSD. The employer is now wasting time and money sending this person for evaluations and on sick leave. Catering to this person that is doing everything except working.

Then the issue is, how do you shoot down or confirm PTSD? you can't so to avoid the inevitable lawsuit you give him the diagnosis. Hell, you can not even diagnose a real or fake back injury.
2011-03-31 06:33:45
jord
Member
+2,382|6937|The North, beyond the wall.
Another victory for my team? Sweet.
2011-03-31 06:37:38
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

jord wrote:

Another victory for my team? Sweet.
I have absolutely no doubt
2011-03-31 06:43:50
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6727
We should just kill all the poor people.
2011-03-31 06:44:37
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6664|North Carolina

Shocking wrote:

Huh? that wouldn't make sense, everyone has a medical file which lists their supposed disabilities. It's not up to the company to retrieve that but the employee, when he's saying "I have major learning disabilities" a company can't fetch his medical file for him.
HIPAA also makes it basically impossible for an employer to have access to your information without your consent.

While protecting patient privacy is a good thing, I would have to agree with lowing that the burden of proof should be on the employee rather than the employer.
2011-03-31 06:47:30
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6975

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
comparative advantage tells me that poor people provide very good cheap labour. i say we keep them.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2011-03-31 07:24:55
UnkleRukus
That Guy
+236|5295|Massachusetts, USA

Cybargs wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
comparative advantage tells me that poor people provide very good cheap labour. i say we keep them.
Slavery gets shit done tbh.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
2011-03-31 07:52:04
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6389|North Tonawanda, NY
I mean, what kind of 'reasonable accomodations' does a diabetic need other than perhaps taking insulin or having to have a snack every few hours?  Or an epileptic?  I mean, really? 

Sigh...
2011-03-31 08:16:35
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
Since you are not posting anything constructive, I will ask.

Do you feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work? Or maybe that is something that should be someone else's responsibility, like,  I dunno, YOURS?
2011-03-31 08:24:50
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6389|North Tonawanda, NY

lowing wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
Since you are not posting anything constructive, I will ask.

Do you feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work? Or maybe that is something that should be someone else's responsibility, like,  I dunno, YOURS?
The thing I always wonder about people who do believe that is...where is their self respect and sense of pride?

And by 'that', I mean " feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work"

Last edited by SenorToenails (2011-03-31 08:25:26)

2011-03-31 08:41:52
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6910|USA

SenorToenails wrote:

lowing wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
Since you are not posting anything constructive, I will ask.

Do you feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work? Or maybe that is something that should be someone else's responsibility, like,  I dunno, YOURS?
The thing I always wonder about people who do believe that is...where is their self respect and sense of pride?

And by 'that', I mean " feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work"
There is no shortage of people in the US with a complete lack of work ethic. It costs the company money which is trickled down to all of us as a burden to carry.
2011-03-31 08:45:52
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6664|North Carolina

lowing wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

We should just kill all the poor people.
Since you are not posting anything constructive, I will ask.

Do you feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work? Or maybe that is something that should be someone else's responsibility, like,  I dunno, YOURS?
I see it as a contract.  There are reasonable limits to compensation for health troubles, but some compensation is part of the agreement.

For any job that is considered decent for long term work, there is an understood assumption that some lenience is shown for those with handicaps.

Now, admittedly, the degree of lenience needed is debatable, but every major employer usually has some sort of ground rules for this.

If the legal definition of handicapped or disabled is being expanded, that does put certain burdens on employers that may actually lead to more unemployment and lower quality employer healthcare plans, so, depending on what is being expanded and by how much, there are going to likely be some unintended consequences.

If it does actually result in classifying the majority of Americans as disabled, that's a serious problem.  Not only is that evidence of a badly defined revision, but it's also going to make firing and hiring a nightmare.

So, again, the concept of an employer looking out for its employees during a time of need is not a bad thing.  It just shouldn't be abused by lawyers, and the best way to prevent that is to keep the definitions somewhat limited.
2011-03-31 08:49:38
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5844

SenorToenails wrote:

I mean, what kind of 'reasonable accomodations' does a diabetic need other than perhaps taking insulin or having to have a snack every few hours?  Or an epileptic?  I mean, really? 

Sigh...
"Bussinesses must provide easy access to a cheap candy machine."
2011-03-31 08:50:20
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6389|North Tonawanda, NY

lowing wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

lowing wrote:

Since you are not posting anything constructive, I will ask.

Do you feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work? Or maybe that is something that should be someone else's responsibility, like,  I dunno, YOURS?
The thing I always wonder about people who do believe that is...where is their self respect and sense of pride?

And by 'that', I mean " feel it is the company's job to cater to your health needs and pay for you not to be at work"
There is no shortage of people in the US with a complete lack of work ethic. It costs the company money which is trickled down to all of us as a burden to carry.
I'm aware, but I just don't understand it!  I hate not having anything to do!
2011-03-31 08:51:09
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6389|North Tonawanda, NY

Macbeth wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

I mean, what kind of 'reasonable accomodations' does a diabetic need other than perhaps taking insulin or having to have a snack every few hours?  Or an epileptic?  I mean, really? 

Sigh...
"Bussinesses must provide easy access to a cheap candy machine."
I dunno, they might get sued for providing the means to make the diabetes worse!
2011-03-31 09:00:46
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5617|London, England

SenorToenails wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

I mean, what kind of 'reasonable accomodations' does a diabetic need other than perhaps taking insulin or having to have a snack every few hours?  Or an epileptic?  I mean, really? 

Sigh...
"Bussinesses must provide easy access to a cheap candy machine."
I dunno, they might get sued for providing the means to make the diabetes worse!
Or get put on the hook for paying for their employees diet plans along with a personal trainer.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2011-03-31 09:33:51
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6389|North Tonawanda, NY

Jay wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

"Bussinesses must provide easy access to a cheap candy machine."
I dunno, they might get sued for providing the means to make the diabetes worse!
Or get put on the hook for paying for their employees diet plans along with a personal trainer.
hahahahaha, I don't get how that kind of shit can be claimed with a straight face.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard