Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 53(1): 6-10, 2023 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2278859

RESUMEN

A key public health measure has received far too little attention over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic: paid sick leave policies that encourage people at risk of spreading disease to stay home rather than come to work. The United States is one of the only developed countries that fails to guarantee paid sick leave at the federal level, leaving a patchwork of state and private policies that undersupply time off when people are contagious and protect top wage earners at wildly disproportionate rates compared with what workers with lower incomes experience. Other countries have shown that sick leave mandates are neither unjustified burdens on employers nor gratuitous giveaways to employees. In fact, sick leave saves on health care costs by making employees less likely to infect coworkers, to be absent for longer themselves, or to need treatment in expensive hospital emergency departments. Nationally guaranteed sick leave is urgently needed to promote public health.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ausencia por Enfermedad , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Salud Pública , Pandemias , Política Pública
2.
J Law Med Ethics ; 50(2): 368-374, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2278858

RESUMEN

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued an emergency temporary standard (ETS) for COVID-19 applicable to private sector employers with 100 or more employees. Among other things, the ETS required employers either to mandate employee vaccination or weekly testing and wearing masks.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Salud Laboral , COVID-19/prevención & control , Salud Ambiental , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration , Vacunación
4.
Hastings Cent Rep ; 52(1): 8-9, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506729

RESUMEN

Many employers are requiring their employees to be vaccinated for Covid-19 to comply with federal, state, or local laws, or to conform to employers' policies. Some employees object to vaccination on religious grounds. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment based on religion and requires employers to reasonably accommodate employees' religious beliefs or practices unless doing so would be an undue hardship to the employer's business. Although a religion need not be an established faith with many followers, philosophical or political objections do not count as religious beliefs. If an employee demonstrates a bona fide religious objection, the issue is whether it can be reasonably accommodated. This will depend on the employer's business, including whether close contact with coworkers or customers is required.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Derechos Civiles , Empleo , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos
6.
J Law Med Ethics ; 49(1): 126-131, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1221086

RESUMEN

Workplace exposure to SARS-CoV-2 has sickened workers and, subsequently, their family members. Family members might be able to recover from the employer in a negligence action using "take-home" liability theory.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/transmisión , Compensación y Reparación/legislación & jurisprudencia , Familia , Responsabilidad Legal , Exposición Profesional/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Mala Praxis/legislación & jurisprudencia , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos , United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration/legislación & jurisprudencia , Indemnización para Trabajadores/legislación & jurisprudencia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA