By Tom Hals

(Reuters) – A federal judge on Friday ruled that a Cincinnati, Ohio-area healthcare provider could require its employees get vaccinated against COVID-19 or risk losing their job, in what appears to be the first ruling of its kind for a private employer in the United States.

St. Elizabeth Healthcare employees failed to prove that the hospital operator’s vaccine requirements were violating their personal liberties. The operator has the right of setting employment terms. U.S District Judge David Bunning from Covington, Kentucky said.

St. Elizabeth Healthcare employees need to be immunized by October 1. In the United States, vaccines are readily available. However, there has been an increase in infections and hospitalizations since the Delta-variant. https://graphics.reuters.com/HEALTH-CORONAVIRUS/USA-TRENDS/dgkvlgkrkpb/index.html

Alan Statman, who represented the employees, said they were evaluating their next steps.

Bunning’s decision is unique in that it involves a request to injunct a private employer against its COVID-19 vaccination mandate. Mark Guilfoyle represented St. Elizabeth.

Numerous large employers have been imposing deadlines on employees in recent weeks to ensure that they are vaccinated. COVID-19 infection rates remain high in America.

On Friday, the Biden administration announced that it will require federal contractors to be vaccinated. These plans will impact tens and millions of Americans.

Many lawsuits against employers for mandating vaccination have resulted, though most cases are still being resolved. In June, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit filed against Houston Methodist Hospital pursuant to Texas’ wrongful termination law.

The claims against St. Elizabeth employees were mainly based on safety concerns regarding the COVID-19 vaccins.

Bunning said that those suspicions do not have the right to override laws.

“If an employee believes his or her individual liberties are more important than legally permissible conditions on his or her employment, that employee can and should choose to exercise another individual liberty, no less significant – the right to seek other employment,” wrote Bunning.