37 Comments
 

Conjecture here, I don't know anything about how this shit would go. Would expect it to be a requirement for those looking to return to the office, choice for others. This obviously doesn't leave much of a choice for the Juniors at a bank as I'm sure the expectation would be to come in at least sometimes when needed. Banks don't need the liability or publicity of illness or death from unvaccinated workers, despite the low chances

 

Ehh....

Being able to keep my nicotine addiction and ripping my dab pen a couple times while turning comments sounds kinda nice tho

 

WFH is growing on me. Definitely more time to focus on other things and more freedom. Only tradeoff I really care about is meeting people in the office for networking purposes. I still go out every weekend with friends so socially it doesnt make too much of a difference 

 

Same boat here. Inject that shit wherever you want if it means I can be in the office to start. As much as I'm sure lots of full time people enjoy WFH after years of commuting and all that shit, I would hate starting like that. Internship was incredibly depressing just doing the work without the fun parts and coworkers to shoot the shit with. 

 

I will gladly take the vaccine instead of continuing to WFH for the past 9 months. Stay at home if you think your sweatpants and neck beard phase is fun but I enjoy the environment and seeing familiar faces. 

 

Bro, I feel ya, but after working this hard to get this offer, idgaf if the vaccine literally gives me cancer.

note: no, I’m not actually insinuating that there’s any statistically significant probability of this vaccine leading a to future cancer diagnosis.

 

I hope they keep up WFH instead. It’s the best thing to happen to bankers. More napping/sleeping time, flexibility to workout, efficiency, etc. Also dont gotta pay for an expensive ass apartment in NYC

Fuck the “camaraderie” if it means I gotta spend time commuting to work every day and lose the ability to do whatever I want during downtime. It’s just a job

This vaccine is gonna ruin everything 

 

Yeah, I totally see how you'd have a better WFH setup than your one at the office. But if you bought a really nice computer, don't firms use a virtual login anyway? I feel like my setup wouldn't really be doing anything extra since it's through VM. Do you live with anyone and do you hangout with them at all? If you get along well, I could easily see how WFH is better for you haha

 

Not even a debate, it wouldn't be legal, some companies might try but it would be an immediate lawsuit if someone was terminated for not getting vaccinated. A corporation cannot force an employee to receive medical treatment, public schools would be an entirely other issue though. Even requiring people to show that they have received a vaccine to be out in public places (which has been a topic of discussion) would be an issue from a legal standpoint as it would be requiring individuals to share personal health information.

 

Note even a debate, it wouldn't be legal, some companies might try but it would be an immediate lawsuit if someone was terminated for not getting vaccinated. A corporation cannot force an employee to receive medical treatment, public schools would be an entirely other issue though. Even requiring people to show that they have received a vaccine to be out in public places (which has been a topic of discussion) would be an issue from a legal standpoint as it would be requiring individuals to share personal health information.

Based on my convos with professors my university won’t be requiring it. Similar legal difficulties as you mentioned. 

Array
 

You're right not a debate - they can 

"Employment in the United States is generally ‘at will,’ which means that your employer can set working conditions,” says Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, who specializes in legal and policy issues related to vaccines. “Certainly, employers can set health and safety work conditions, with a few limits."

https://www.aarp.org/work/working-at-50-plus/info-2020/employer-require…

 

There is a lot more to it when you are talking about At Will employment and forcing an employee to receive medical treatment to keep their job. There is no legal precedent for this, which I noticed was not cited anywhere in the article to give their broad assumption any standing. Look at the cases that have been litigated around employers that have tried to fire people for being smokers, in many states it is illegal for an employer to fire an employee for being a smoker. You really think any judge will be want to be the one who opened the door for employers to be able to force medical treatments upon their employees, no way that happens.

 

https://www.aarp.org/work/working-at-50-plus/info-2020/employer-require…

Pretty sure the legal consensus around vaccination in the workplace is that they can (regardless of the field -- it's not just medicine even though that's where previous litigation has happened), but they ALSO have to give you an option if you choose to object on the basis of religious beliefs or health concerns (health concerns as in you're someone who physically cannot take vaccines, not health concerns as in you're afraid to take it for some reason).  One option being discussed is allowing workers to remain WFH if they choose to not vaccinate. However, if your company chooses to enact a vaccination requirement, and they give you the option to work at home, but you continue to come into the office unvaccinated, they're well within their legal rights to fire you. 

Array
 

Upon being fired said employee will then take their employer to court and the employer will lose. At will employment does not grant employers overarching power to force employees to do as their told or they're fired. Employers have tried to hide behind that many times and lost, one example being the case of being a smoker as I mentioned above. Healthcare related issues such as vaccination requirements are on a whole other level. If a judge were to side with an employer in such matter allowing them to require vaccinations it would set a legal precedent that employers can force their employees to undergo medical treatment, which is a dangerous and slippery slope that no judge wants to be responsible for setting. You're looking at this issue on a base level from some article you read, but the law is a complex beast that goes much deeper than a news article is willing to go. Yes, at a base level a company can fire an employee if they refuse to get vaccinated but the reality is they will be sued and they will lose that case creating precedent that employers cannot hide behind at will employment in order to force employees to get vaccinated. During law school I never came across any cases involving vaccines and employment (outside of healthcare related fields) but when it comes to issues like this employers typically lose.

 

For everyone saying that they would rather stay at home and do the work and don't want to be in the office... i have only this to say:

don't be suprised when that "home remote work" is no longer your home and is some corporate building off shore down the line. The only thing keeping your jobs from getting replaced by in an influx of supply are H1B visa restrictions

 

Reiciendis debitis vitae alias qui et ea. Reiciendis accusantium dolor quas est libero dicta. Ex aliquid ad occaecati est ea aliquam hic eaque. Veniam voluptatem in est incidunt impedit quas hic. Aliquam molestias qui repellat eveniet temporibus quia sequi.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”