How to Discuss Masks with your U.S. Employer

634

•

My goal here is to establish little to no value of COVID vaccination in the work place - but this must be done by NOT DISCUSSING THE VALUE OF THE VACCINE ITSELF. My employer already has a vaccination-not-required policy communicated from the top. This step is to confirm of the wisdom of this policy. You'll read here how managing vaccinated and unvaccinated employees becomes a complete clusterfuck in a U.S. workplace when considering OSHA guidance.

I recently had a discussion with an HR manager on my large employer’s mask policy which I’ll simplify to: • Share a copy of your COVID vaccination record • No mask required for you

I focused narrowly on the risk to the business from this policy, and used government information sources to build this case. It was well received by the manager who told me that this information was: • New information that had not been carefully considered • Was not controversial in any way • This was something that she planned to research based on my input

There is plenty to work with in this area and I want to share it with you if you are motivated to create your own feedback for your employers without being a total sperg. Here are key points:

Topic #1: Putting at-risk employees in jeopardy 1) 2) 3) The definition of at-risk employee is impossible for the business to manage: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html#:~:text=Immunocompromised%20state%20(weakened%20immune%20system,have%20a%20weakened%20immune%20system

The risk is that the company will believe that they are following CDC public health guidelines but this may be judged by OSHA as the systematic endangerment of at-risk employees because of lack of control of at-risk status. This is a big deal as the company should have reason to know of at-risk status before allowing an individual to work without a mask.

Topic #2: Racial Inequity • • Get the count of vaccinations by race for your county from your state health department. My state has this, yours probably will too. • Divide Vaccinations Given by Race percentage by Census Population Percentage to estimate racial makeup of unmasked employees: ◦ 42% of vaccine given to whites, 48% of population is white = 42/48 = 88% of whites can work with out masks ◦ 1.8% of vaccine given to blacks, 13% of population is black = 1.8/13 = 14% of blacks can work without masks ◦ Repeat for all race categories for which data is available. ◦ Don't mix state data and county data. Use County/County if you can, or State/State if you must. Keep it local.

The policy will favor some groups over “vaccine under-served communities of color…,” I am confident you’ll know how to state this in a way that will resonate with the HR department. This was a point of particular interest to my audience. I am now a diversity and inclusion champion in my workplace, and you niggerfaggots can be one too!

Topic #3: This may create the appearance of an exclusionary work environment • Excludes employees based on health status (bonus points for pointing out diseases which are common in age, racial groups, disability...) • Excludes employees based on pregnancy • Excludes employees based on race through inequitable distribution of vaccines

The Hard Questions As you are communicating this risk to the business it is completely appropriate for you to include the tough questions in here, because management will have to consider whether they want to answer stuff like this to an employee, the media, or before a jury: • Why do you allow at-risk employees to work without a mask when they are much more likely to become seriously ill from the COVID? • How will you know when a vaccinated employee becomes at-risk because of pregnancy, BMI, recently diagnosed medical condition, or any other reason? • Why do we allow a system with measurable racial inequality to determine who may work without a mask? Is that an argument that you really want to make? • How will excluding at-risk employees from mask-free work impact engagement, retention, and advancement for those employees? • Any such question you can think of is in-bounds as you are trying to anticipate the risk to the business

I was nervous about this meeting and sharing this information, but I kept on point with careful analysis of the information I’m leading you to. I think it was well received. It is a strong argument that vaccination status is useless to the employer, and even a risk, when considering how it is necessary to track vaccinated-but-at-risk status versus vaccinated-not-at-risk which will be super problematic. This entire meeting was completed without a discussion of whether masks and vaccines work or if they are safe. Even if you suspect that COVID vaccination is a masonic global depopulation plan you can still have a serious conversation with your normie employer and be regarded as a serious person. As always, keep your power-level in check.

My goal here is to establish little to no value of COVID vaccination in the work place - **but this must be done by NOT DISCUSSING THE VALUE OF THE VACCINE ITSELF.** My employer already has a vaccination-not-required policy communicated from the top. This step is to confirm of the wisdom of this policy. You'll read here how managing vaccinated and unvaccinated employees becomes a complete clusterfuck in a U.S. workplace when considering OSHA guidance. I recently had a discussion with an HR manager on my large employer’s mask policy which I’ll simplify to: • Share a copy of your COVID vaccination record • No mask required for you I focused narrowly on the risk to the business from this policy, and used government information sources to build this case. It was well received by the manager who told me that this information was: • New information that had not been carefully considered • Was not controversial in any way • This was something that she planned to research based on my input There is plenty to work with in this area and I want to share it with you if you are motivated to create your own feedback for your employers without being a total sperg. Here are key points: **Topic #1: Putting at-risk employees in jeopardy** 1) [Allowing vaccinated employees to work without a mask generally implements CDC guidance.](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html) 2) [OSHA has its own workplace guidance which classifies unvaccinated and certain vaccinated persons as, “at-risk.”](https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/safework) 3) The definition of at-risk employee is impossible for the business to manage: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html#:~:text=Immunocompromised%20state%20(weakened%20immune%20system,have%20a%20weakened%20immune%20system The risk is that the company will believe that they are following CDC public health guidelines but this may be judged by OSHA as the systematic endangerment of at-risk employees because of lack of control of at-risk status. This is a big deal as the company should have reason to know of at-risk status before allowing an individual to work without a mask. **Topic #2: Racial Inequity** • [Get the census population shares by race from census quick facts for your empoloyer's county]( https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219) • Get the count of vaccinations by race for your county from your state health department. My state has this, yours probably will too. • Divide Vaccinations Given by Race percentage by Census Population Percentage to estimate racial makeup of unmasked employees: ◦ 42% of vaccine given to whites, 48% of population is white = 42/48 = 88% of whites can work with out masks ◦ 1.8% of vaccine given to blacks, 13% of population is black = 1.8/13 = 14% of blacks can work without masks ◦ Repeat for all race categories for which data is available. ◦ Don't mix state data and county data. Use County/County if you can, or State/State if you must. Keep it local. The policy will favor some groups over “vaccine under-served communities of color…,” I am confident you’ll know how to state this in a way that will resonate with the HR department. **This was a point of particular interest to my audience.** I am now a diversity and inclusion champion in my workplace, and you niggerfaggots can be one too! **Topic #3: This may create the appearance of an exclusionary work environment** • Excludes employees based on health status (bonus points for pointing out diseases which are common in age, racial groups, disability...) • Excludes employees based on pregnancy • Excludes employees based on race through inequitable distribution of vaccines **The Hard Questions** As you are communicating this risk to the business it is completely appropriate for you to include the tough questions in here, because management will have to consider whether they want to answer stuff like this to an employee, the media, or before a jury: • Why do you allow at-risk employees to work without a mask when they are much more likely to become seriously ill from the COVID? • How will you know when a vaccinated employee becomes at-risk because of pregnancy, BMI, recently diagnosed medical condition, or any other reason? • Why do we allow a system with measurable racial inequality to determine who may work without a mask? Is that an argument that you really want to make? • How will excluding at-risk employees from mask-free work impact engagement, retention, and advancement for those employees? • Any such question you can think of is in-bounds as you are trying to anticipate the risk to the business I was nervous about this meeting and sharing this information, but I kept on point with careful analysis of the information I’m leading you to. I think it was well received. It is a strong argument that vaccination status is useless to the employer, and even a risk, when considering how it is necessary to track vaccinated-but-at-risk status versus vaccinated-not-at-risk which will be super problematic. This entire meeting was completed without a discussion of whether masks and vaccines work or if they are safe. Even if you suspect that COVID vaccination is a masonic global depopulation plan you can still have a serious conversation with your normie employer and be regarded as a serious person. As always, keep your power-level in check.

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

I am side stepping whether vaccines are effective because you will sound like a nutjob to normies. There is a strong regulatory argument here which basically says that vaccinated employees do not reduce risk for the business, and effectively increase their risk. You can make that case, and management will actually consider it, or you can sperg about vaccines, "which have been proven safe and effective..." Good luck with that. Facts do not matter, but your business being ground up between the finer points of ambiguity between CDC and OSHA, well that does matter to management. So does discrimination based on sex, race, and health.

Edit: if you research masks as source control you may be able to put something together along your line of thinking but you will need to clearly establish that masks are for source control maybe from the EUA. Then using published endpoints for vaccine design you can make the case that source control is still necessary for vaccinated people, but this is an argument that CDC is wrong which would be a heavy lift for your employer. Much easier to show where they get spitroasted by OSHA and CDC if they don't deal with the at-risk definition I discuss in the post.

[–] • 1 pt

>I am side stepping whether vaccines are effective

Like I said before, you have to play by their rules. Doctors, "scientists", but most importantly the vaccine manufacturers (in other words, their sources, the sources they listen to and are willing to believe) have stated that the injections don't prevent you from catching Covid. That they only prevent people from clogging up the healthcare system. - Point this out to the brainwashed, and they'll be forced to agree.

You can't debate them. You can't use facts. But what you can do is use what they believe against them.

>if you research masks as source control

You'll never convince them. They can't blow out a candle while wearing a mask. So they believe that they can't breath viruses out of their mask. Facts, truth, their holy "peer reviewed studies" can't change that.

The only way to win is to play by their rules. To out virtue signal the virtuous. To be safer and save more lives. They've spent the last year and a half demonising others for not being safe enough. And because of that, they will do anything they can to avoid having others say that they aren't being safe enough, that they're everything that they've been told to hate.

Good job on the whole - You're a racist if..... - part of your case though. That's what forced them to actually listen.

"...systemic and multidimensional discrimination..." Lol

(post is archived)