Corporate flu vaccinations are efficient and effective exercises that protect businesses all across Australia.
As the flu season emerges over autumn, it is imperative that individuals are not adversely affected and take proactive action.
Companies can actually play a leading role and hire these medical providers to undertake the task for everyone’s sake.
Yet there are some common misconceptions about these programs that prevent enterprises from booking appointments.
We will challenge them directly.
“They Take Too Long To Organize”
Corporate flu vaccinations can be easily booked and instigated within the space of a couple of business days. Simply by engaging a referral or contacting a provider promptly before flu season arrives in the autumn and winter months, one work day can be reserved as the specialist inoculates individuals one-by-one. Outside of a short window of a couple of minutes following the injection and a moment of monitoring, they are able to get back to their daily routine unencumbered by the shot.
“They Are Too Costly For The Company”
Corporate flu vaccinations are cost effective exercises where businesses can access a comprehensive and obligation-free quote for the program. Whilst there is a fee involved, there are incentives to include more members for a greater overall deal. Those who avoid these exercises end up experiencing a far higher absentee rate that drives up costs and lowers expertise on site, creating a myriad of other problems that eats into the bottom line of the organisation.
“Employees Are Better Suited Managing Their Own Vaccines”
Professionals are indeed in a more vulnerable situation if they are left to their own devices are not part of any corporate flu vaccinations. There is no degree of oversight as an employee could be dealing with a family doctor or a dubious operator who does not have the necessary credentials to issue advice on vaccines. These environments could expose citizens to disease and without having that control where the medicine is documented and accounted for, it opens up a company to a higher threshold of risk.
“Some Employees Will Resist To Complicate The Procedure”
We will concede that the first part of this misconception around corporate flu vaccinations can be true. Whether it is due to a particular medical condition, a strongly held religious belief or because they have already been inoculated with a particular shot, there could be some small degree of pushback from workers who won’t want to participate in the program. Yet the second element to this point is painfully off the mark because this is a procedure that will not be overtly delayed or complicated due to those conditions. If specified and communicated to the practitioner, this matter will simply be documented and clarified as they move on to other department members who are receiving the vaccine.
“Workers Get Sick During Flu Season Anyway”
The final misconception regarding corporate flu vaccinations is arguably the most common and laziest of the lot – that irrespective of what action it taken, employees will fall ill because it is simply that time of year. Adopting a defeatist attitude is not a quality that successful managers will incorporate into their business, yet somehow it applies to vaccinating their most important assets. Should this decision be delayed or there are gaps in attendance to the initiative then yes, employees will get sick anyway. However, if proactive action is taken where participants are inoculated and safeguarded against the latest strain of flu, this won’t be an issue that has to be dealt with.
There are more dangerous examples of pushback that will point to unsubstantiated claims and conspiracy theories that link these initiatives to cases of autism and illness, each one debunked categorically by the medical community at large. Corporate flu vaccinations work by instigating effective shots that give medical aid and eliminate these diseases from infecting the body. Common misconceptions on this topic should never be ignored but addressed directly, because one organisation that fails their due diligence can adversely affect the remainder of the community.