As I understand it, they can't force you in the sense that they can't force you to do anything. But they can stop paying you if you don't (with perhaps some narrow exceptions such as sincerely held religious beliefs or medical conditions that preclude vacccination, as these could fall under protected classes or disability protections).

In order to know who is eligible for medical exceptions, you'd have to ask people about their medical conditions which could run afoul of the ADA.

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...

> you'd have to ask people about their medical conditions

Not necessarily. You would have the employee represent and warrant to it. If they lie and it causes a problem down the road, they’re clearly liable, that’s fraudulent misrepresentation and the company is in the clear.

What problem? They would continue working from home I would assume.

> would continue working from home I would assume

Is anybody proposing vaccine requirements for remote-only workers? The announcement this thread is based on literally carves out this exception.

Nobody is proposing them that I know of, nor was I suggesting anyone was. I'm suggesting that people should have the option but not the requirement to provide vaccination status and those who don't wish to provide their vaccination status should WFH indefinitely. Note, Google has only extended their WFH guidelines until Oct. 18th. To me it sounds like they're trying to get most employees back into the office by the end of the year whether they want to or not.

> those who don't wish to provide their vaccination status should WFH indefinitely

I agree with this. I don't believe every employer has the obligation to support this choice. WFH has been largely normalised--if it's a requirement for someone, they can find their place.

Yeah have to disagree. When COVID is actually over, as in the virus is mostly eradicated, that might make sense. Forcing people back into crowded offices unnecessarily--even vaccinated offices-- while the pandemic is still going on is cruel. If Google takes that stance then I feel people are perfectly justified in lying to obtain a religious or medical exemption.

> I feel people are perfectly justified in lying to obtain a religious or medical exemption

I suppose they have the moral right. But if they get infected, the costs are on them. If they get others infected, their costs are on them. And of course, fraudulent misrepresentation and all that.

Again, we are talking about WFH. And potentially for vaccinated people who just aren't ready to go back to the office.

Presumably you've never worked somewhere that required a drug test?

Drugs (per drug policy/theory) might affect work performance, and drug tests can be specified as a condition of employment.

Drug tests require information about the contents of your bodily fluids.

Unvaccinated COVID-19 infection is a health threat to on-site employees, and it is in the best interest of every employer to minimize this occurrence by keeping unvaccinated employees away from everyone else.

Google can easily manage that by having employees who claim to be unvaccinated or who don't wish to state their vaccination status to permanently work from home. No one is suggesting to send them back to the office.

Or to simply fire them. There's no shortage of people ready and able to go into a Google office for a big paycheck.

I mean, schools can force parents to tell them if their kids are vaccinated. There are exceptions to ADA/HIPAA "no information can shared/asked for at all."

Public school students don't have the ability to work from home. The closest equivalent, homeschoolers, aren't required to provide vaccine info.