You're pretty spot on, but I disagree with this statement: "Discrimination can only legally occur if there is a real threat, and it is up to the discriminator to prove that such a threat exists."
Regarded as claims are wholly without "real" threat. They are inferred threat, and discrimination because of the threat.
I do indeed consider that classifying an employee as "unvaccinated" and then threatening to terminate them if they do not take the accommodation (vax) that the employer offers, as regarded as disabled, discrimination, and using the prohibited acts to enforce this bogus policy.
These policies also create an additional disability, in that they substantially limit the major life activities of thinking, concentrating, caring for oneself, working, interacting with others, etc., because of the use of the prohibited acts and the effects this has on the employee's major life activities.
You're pretty spot on, but I disagree with this statement: "Discrimination can only legally occur if there is a real threat, and it is up to the discriminator to prove that such a threat exists."
Regarded as claims are wholly without "real" threat. They are inferred threat, and discrimination because of the threat.
I do indeed consider that classifying an employee as "unvaccinated" and then threatening to terminate them if they do not take the accommodation (vax) that the employer offers, as regarded as disabled, discrimination, and using the prohibited acts to enforce this bogus policy.
These policies also create an additional disability, in that they substantially limit the major life activities of thinking, concentrating, caring for oneself, working, interacting with others, etc., because of the use of the prohibited acts and the effects this has on the employee's major life activities.