To Liz Concordia, Kevin Unger, Joel Yuhas, Marilyn Shock, Chris Gessner, Dallis Howard-Crow, Gary Reiff, David Mafe, Jeff Johnson, Michael Kalisher, Anjanette Mosebar, Erik Taylor, the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, the Office of Employee Health, and Whomever else it may concern:
I am a Permanent Charge nurse at Poudre Valley Hospital. I am Board Certified in Medical-Surgical Nursing and a Magnet recipient for Transformational Leadership in 2020. I have worked for PVH for almost twelve years. It was my childhood dream to become a nurse to serve my community, and I have worked endlessly to reach what I consider the height of my career. I am writing this letter on behalf of the staff listed and those who have chosen to remain anonymous or unlisted for fear of punitive action on the attached signature page.
It is with great concern and heavy hearts that we compose this letter in response to your announcement of mandatory vaccination by October 1, 2021. To start, we are by no means “anti-vaxers.” We do, however, hold sincere religious and/or moral beliefs against the COVID EUA injection as well as health histories that make receiving the injection unjustifiable.
We absolutely support the rights of people to choose the COVID EUA injection for themselves. But in return, we should have equal rights to choose not to receive the injection. For these reasons, we have a few questions.
There is a major push within UCHealth and the world in general to respect, “my body, my choice.” UCHealth facilities are now performing elective abortions as well as gender reassignment surgery. Any one of us could walk into our place of work tomorrow and expect our employer and colleagues to call us by our preferred pronoun instead of the gender they have always known us by. Failing to do so could lead to punitive action as not abiding by this code of conduct is labeled discriminatory. The system seems to support and champion choice and will not tolerate discrimination. It is broadcasted under the title of “inclusivity.” How is our right to choose not to receive the COVID EUA different? How is incentivizing employees $500-$1,000 to make the decision the system prefers, which is to get the COVID EUA, not exclusion, intimidation, and discrimination against those who do not comply? Furthermore, this email sent on June 8, 2021, is concerning: “With the majority of our workforce vaccinated and protected, we will be ending this program (the 7ZQ) for unvaccinated employees effective Sunday, June 27.
Unvaccinated employees should take PTO or HFWA-PTO for scheduled hours missed to be tested for COVID-19 or if they are sick and isolating due to COVID-19 infection. At this time, 7ZQ will continue to be paid for employees who are vaccinated and miss scheduled hours due to testing because of symptoms of COVID-19.” Dallis Howard-Crow, Chief Human Resources Officer helped foster this standard: “At UCHealth, we improve lives by cultivating an inclusive culture that respects and celebrates differences and commonalities. We welcome and encourage diversity of thought, enabling us to better serve our communities and empowering our patients and families to live extraordinary lives.”
The examples provided here are the opposite of inclusion and acceptance. Furthermore, subjecting unvaccinated staff to weekly testing and masking even when outdoors is discrimination and exclusive. With the Delta variant spreading in the vaccinated population, what is the rationale behind this rule? Any false positive that may come as a result of asymptomatic testing will require us to quarantine without assistance from the 7ZQ program. The fact that our fellow vaccinated co-workers will not be held to this routine testing and will still receive compensation should they contract the virus is discrimination.
Why is it necessary that we submit our rationale in detail to employee health in order to received exemption forms? It is not our employer’s business to know what medical conditions we are being treated for. Should that not be a discussion between us and our physicians? Our religious views are also important factors supporting our personal opposition to this EUA injection. That conversation should be between us and our spiritual leaders, not us and employee health as they may not share the same views that we do. In addition, we are being held to deadlines for submitting required forms and documentation but waiting for a response from employee health has impeded the ability to move forward in a timely manner. Many have reported that due to the immediacy of this mandate and the sudden unforeseen rush to make appointments, it is near impossible to get into a primary care physicians office in the given time frame. For those of us who are striving to abide by the deadlines you have given, can there please be a time extension?
On June 8, 2021, in the COVID 19 update #90, it was stated that the vaccine would be required once FDA approval was achieved. We were not provided any information regarding why this suddenly changed. Recent news reports as well as CDC announcements and data have determined that the Delta Variant is spreading amongst the vaccinated as well as the unvaccinated.
How do these findings support the sudden and immediate rush to get more employees vaccinated?
Across the system there is a massive staff shortage. We are working, on average, 2-4 staff members short each day per unit! We are not providing excellent care. Morale is at an all-time low. The best employees in the system are performing at sub-par levels due to burnout and compassion fatigue. Staff are leaving, not coming, and that includes the vaccinated staff population. Countless positions are posted across multiple health systems and, as evidenced by the lack of applicants in our regions, it does not seem the problem will be fixed come October. Empathy for our patients is lacking, and quite honestly, because of the aforementioned issues, it has become a dangerous environment for both employees and patients.
How is UCHealth going to support the community after letting go of employees who do not feel comfortable getting the EUA injection but who are more than willing to report for duty? We love our careers. We will be devastated if we are terminated on October 1st but we will not jeopardize our health, our beliefs, or our moral convictions. We also fear for our coworkers, our patients, and our communities should UCHealth move forward with their decision to potentially terminate employees with such a shortage already.
The most recent letter on July 28, 2021 states, “Any employees who remain out of compliance will face disciplinary action up to and including termination.” Can you please define specifically what is meant by this?
Thank you for taking the time to read and consider what we have asked. In addition, we have attached to this email a document that we would like addressed and returned. It covers our rights to know if and how we will be protected should we receive the EUA injection and suffer any adverse effects. It also covers the absolute need for full disclosure on the injections themselves, including specific lists of ingredients for each company’s EUA so that each of us can make an informed decision on how best to move forward.
UCHealth Employees
We are trying to fight for our individual rights, medical concerns, religious freedoms so that we may care for our patients, our families, and ourselves. We are experiencing severe staffing shortages now – what will happen when UCHealth chooses to fire us on October 1, 2021? How did we go from Heros to Zeros? The other fact is the UCHealth has tried to bribe their employees with a supposed taxed incentive of $500-1,000 for those who receive the shot. Our Religious exemptions that have been requested are now being subjected to having a third party verification. If we as American Citizens can represent ourselves in a court of law why can’t we represent ourselves on our personal and religious beliefs? Isn’t that against the law?
Stevie Silver, RN-BSN, BC Permanent Charge RN
Patti Schneeberger, RN-BSN