Member Login | Join HCAOA
Home Care Association of America
  • Membership Resources
    • Member Login
    • Code of Conduct
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
    • Product & Services Guide
    • Join HCAOA
    • Member-Get-A-Member
    • Benefits: Agency Membership
    • Benefits: Associate Membership
  • State Chapters
    • State Chapters
  • Education/Events
    • Calendar
    • On-Demand Video Library
    • 2025 National Home Care Conference >
      • Exhibitor Opportunities
      • Sponsorship Opportunities
  • Advocacy/Policy
    • Advocacy Fund
    • Issues & Positions
    • Legislative Action Network
    • State & Federal Legislative and Regulatory Tracker
    • Industry Reports
    • Home Care by the Numbers
  • About HCAOA
    • Mission & Vision
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Staff
    • Caregiver of the Year Award
    • News Releases
    • Sponsorship Opportunities
    • Contact Us
  • Find a Job

Court Upholds Vaccine Mandate Again

10/20/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. 

Legal challenges to vaccine mandates continue. One of the most recent challenges already addressed by the Court is Christy Beckerich, et al v. St. Elizabeth Medical Center, et al [Civil Case No. 21-105-DLB-EBA, (E.D. Ky. Sept. 24, 2021)]. In this case, the Court rejected employees’ request for a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction to block vaccine mandates based on its conclusion that private employers can modify employment conditions to require employees to be vaccinated in response to an unprecedented global pandemic. 

The Plaintiffs in this case are a group of healthcare workers, both past and presently employed by St. Elizabeth Medical Center and Summit Medical Group. 

​Under the Defendants’ policy of mandatory vaccination, before October 1, 2021, employees were required to either receive a COVID-19 vaccine, or to submit a request for a medical exemption or an exemption based on sincerely held religious beliefs. The vaccination policy also states that failure to comply without an exemption may result in termination of employment. The focus of the employees’ objection is that the policy infringes upon their constitutional rights. Employees also claim that the Defendants have not approved religious and medical accommodations to the policy as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII).
 
With regard to the employees’ constitutional claims, the Court stated that there is a line between state action subject to scrutiny under the 14th Amendment and private conduct that is not subject to such scrutiny. Under the “state action doctrine,” employees’ constitutional claims are invalid unless they can show that the Defendants are “state actors.” The fact that the government licenses or contracts with private entities, said the Court, does not convert private entities into state actors unless the private entity is performing a traditional, exclusive public function. No matter how much federal funding private healthcare providers may receive, the Court said that they are generally not state actors for purposes of constitutional questions. Because employees cannot show that the Defendants are state actors, their constitutional claims “have zero likelihood of success on the merits” and are “virtually nonexistent.”
 
The Court then acknowledged that the Hospital is required to offer medical and religious accommodations to its mandatory vaccination policy. However, both the ADA and Title VII require exhaustion of administrative remedies before lawsuits are filed. In other words, employees cannot go directly to the Courts. 
 
The Court then addressed the ADA claims. The ADA generally prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals on the basis of disability as it applies to aspects of employment, including hiring, advancement and firing. Employers are required to provide disabled employees with “reasonable accommodations” to avoid discrimination. With regard to vaccine mandates, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has advised employers that they must provide processes by which disabled employees can seek medical exemptions to vaccine requirements. In this case, employees claimed that the Hospital “corrupted” the process of reasonable accommodations for disabled employees with no right to appeal denials.
 
In response, the Court said that, on the contrary, the Defendants have either granted full exemptions or granted deferments to seventy-five percent of employees who requested medical accommodations. Defendants granted thirty-one medical exemptions and one hundred forty-three deferments, more accommodations than there were Plaintiffs in this case. The Court also noted that there was a complete lack of adverse employment effects suffered by Plaintiffs. Two of the Plaintiffs received medical exemptions.
 
In order to prove their claims under Title VII, employees were required to show that they:
  • Hold a sincere religious belief that conflicts with an employment requirement
  • Have informed the employer about the conflicts
  • Were discharged or disciplined for failing to comply with the conflicting employment requirement
 
The Court pointed out that, in this case, none of the employees have been denied religious exemptions, so they could not prove their claims under Title VI. 
 
The Court also rejected the Plaintiffs’ claim of irreparable harm from the vaccine mandate because the employees can find other jobs. At least one of the employees had, in fact, already done so.
 
The Court then said that “No Plaintiff is being imprisoned and vaccinated against his or her will...Rather these Plaintiffs are choosing whether to comply with a condition of employment, or to deal with the potential consequences of that choice.”
 
Finally, the Court noted that the Jacobsen case, which we previously wrote about, has not been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court and remains in effect. Other Courts will likely adopt the reasoning in this case in response to further attempts to block vaccine mandates.

Copyright 2021 Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. All rights reserved.
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020

    Categories

    All
    Accreditation
    Advocacy
    AI
    Alabama
    Arizona
    Award
    California
    Caregiver
    Chapters
    Colorado
    Conference
    Connecticut
    COVID 19
    COVID-19
    Data
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Education
    Florida
    Georgia
    Hawaii
    Illinois
    Immigration
    Indiana
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Legal
    Legislative
    Massachusetts
    Medi
    Medicaid
    Medicare
    Member Benefits
    Member News
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Nevada
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    New York
    North Carolina
    Ohio
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Recruitment
    Reimbursement
    Research
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Sponsorships
    Technology
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Vendor
    Veterans Administration
    Virginia
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wisconsin
    Workforce
    Wyoming

    RSS Feed

    Upcoming Events

Picture
HCAOA
About
Committees
Board
Staff

Chapters
State Chapters
Products/Services
Advertise with Us
Products & Services
Find a Job


Follow Us
Phone: 202-519-2960​ | 444 N. Capitol Street NW, Suite 428 |  Washington, DC 20001
[email protected]
 |
sitemap
​
© 2024 Home Care Association of America.  All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Refund Policy
  • Membership Resources
    • Member Login
    • Code of Conduct
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
    • Product & Services Guide
    • Join HCAOA
    • Member-Get-A-Member
    • Benefits: Agency Membership
    • Benefits: Associate Membership
  • State Chapters
    • State Chapters
  • Education/Events
    • Calendar
    • On-Demand Video Library
    • 2025 National Home Care Conference >
      • Exhibitor Opportunities
      • Sponsorship Opportunities
  • Advocacy/Policy
    • Advocacy Fund
    • Issues & Positions
    • Legislative Action Network
    • State & Federal Legislative and Regulatory Tracker
    • Industry Reports
    • Home Care by the Numbers
  • About HCAOA
    • Mission & Vision
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Staff
    • Caregiver of the Year Award
    • News Releases
    • Sponsorship Opportunities
    • Contact Us
  • Find a Job