For employers, I think it's mostly a matter of avoiding the lost employee-hours and corresponding lost revenue. For instance (though only an anecdote), a local Starbucks had to close for a few days as enough employees had symptoms to make appropriate staffing impossible.
Yes, that logic makes a bit more sense. However, if an employer can control an employee's personal decision to maximize their work hours, why stop at vaccines? Require everyone stop smoking, drinking, drug use, work out consistently, eat healthily, etc. Vaccines, even against covid-19, are the least likely to impact work hours.
Many employers already provide incentives (including cash) to participate in "wellness" programs, and many often will perform drug tests prior to and even during employment.
For most of the things you mention, it's possible for the employee to control the impact it has on their work hours. You can drink while ensuring you're not drunk or hungover at work, for example. For COVID, it's not possible to control the impact; if you have COVID, you do not work. Additionally, you can spread COVID to other employees prior to a positive test or symptoms and consequently affect the business outside of your personal availability. That's not really the case with drinking or a refusal to exercise.
Sounds like the same restrictions can apply to covid. People die from flu and numerous other diseases, but I've never worked anywhere that has mandated such vaccinations. The only exception I know of is meningitis in Texas, and that is really bad, a person can be infected and dead in hours and it is quite infectious. Not at all comparable to covid.
> Require everyone stop smoking, drinking, drug use, work out consistently, eat healthily, etc. Vaccines, even against covid-19, are the least likely to impact work hours.
I'm curious, are you not in the US?
Many workplaces routinely test employees for drugs, even drugs that are legal in their states. Employment at many places is conditioned specifically on not using drugs.
Similarly, employees at many firms must maintain an adequate credit rating or risk termination. So the slippery slope you describe...we've already slid down it.
>Many workplaces routinely test employees for drugs, even drugs that are legal in their states. Employment at many places is conditioned specifically on not using drugs.
Outside employers who have the federal government as a direct customer and employees who have to deal with DOT rules (truck drivers) drug testing is incredibly rare. Employers aren't dumb enough to voluntarily restrict their talent pool in that manner.
These are just spot checks of the top 10 largest employers. Obviously, sectors such as transportation and finance also have broadly embraced drug screens.
Based on my experience in IT, they are not outliers. As a contractor, I've even had to submit to drug testing for contract gigs in the past.
As a person who has worked a couple low-wage jobs (warehouse, retail), drug tests were the norm. Employers are trying to avoid flaky workers or ones likely to quit.
