Covid-19

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Missus raised a fair point. If everyone is to return to work tomorrow, and they have kids - who’s going to look after the kids?

Did you miss the part where he said schools would be in June for reopening?

Parents will clearly remain furloughed.

[Jakubclaret]

Missus raised a fair point. If everyone is to return to work tomorrow, and they have kids - who’s going to look after the kids?

Wherever or whoever you work for - in the event that you have children, special allowances need to be made whether that’s continuing to work from home or going on short time or changing your usual days & hours, Basically it’s more than an acceptable excuse not to return to work if you’ve explored all avenues of work around unsuccessfully, childcare comes first.

[FactualFrank]

Missus raised a fair point. If everyone is to return to work tomorrow, and they have kids - who’s going to look after the kids?

I assume it's a case of go back to work if it's (a) safe to do so and (b) they can't work from home.

So people with nobody to look after the kids won't go back to work.

[Zlatan]

Did you miss the part where he said schools would be in June for reopening?

Parents will clearly remain furloughed.

Sorry Sid, did you miss the part where the government have performed a massive clusterf#ck and I can’t see how anyone can defend them.

[Grumps]

There's this Ipsos Mori poll from late April Grumps,of course hindsight's wonderful.https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/ ... nues-grow

Thanks... Always wonder who takes part in these surveys, of which political persuasion, age etc.
Iam over 60,never been asked to take part in one, and I don't know anybody else who has.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Sorry Sid, did you miss the part where the government have performed a massive clusterf#ck and I can’t see how anyone can defend them.

I haven't defended anyone, just pointed out to you that schools are looking at a June reopening time potentially, so the logic is parents would remain furloughed.

It wasn't even that difficult to come to that conclusion unless you really didn't want too.

[Zlatan]

I assume it's a case of go back to work if it's (a) safe to do so and (b) they can't work from home.

So people with nobody to look after the kids won't go back to work.

I understand what you’ve stated, however I can see employers forcing people to return to work or face sanctions. This approach from Bo Jong Sun is so vague in its nature which means that they can and will spin their way out of their own cockup

[android]

So you won’t answer a simple question. I’ll ask again. Do you agree with the majority of the country that the U.K. entered lockdown too late?

Maybe Holty was inadvertently right about your question Martin. Whatever any individual or the majority thinks about your question; the reality is that no-one knows whether going into lockdown earlier would have produced a better outcome. At this point, we don't even know whether it was the right thing to do to go into lockdown at all.

[Zlatan]

I haven't defended anyone, just pointed out to you that schools are looking at a June reopening time potentially, so the logic is parents would remain furloughed.

It wasn't even that difficult to come to that conclusion unless you really didn't want too.

I’m glad your convinced the schools will go back on June 1st. I’m sure he actually stated (or a newsreader did) that the years to potentially go back are reception; year 1; and year 6 - basically those age groups that define the schools performance. What about the rest of them? My good lady works in a school and her head teacher has already e-mailed the staff to state that he will not open the school if it is not safe.

Clusterf#ck - like I said

[martin_p]

What a muddle of a statement by the PM tonight. ‘Stay Alert’? Back to work tomorrow if you can’t work from home (and your employer has about 12 hours to make your workplace COVID safe), and non of this applies outside of England so if you live near a border you need to be careful!

[nyclaret]

So you can go sit in a park with members of your own household. But how will the police know who’s in your household? How will they police that?

[Zlatan]

The longer this pantomime goes on the more I think there’s something more sinister afoot. My money is on global warming, and we’re all dead within 5 years anyway

[FactualFrank]

So you can go sit in a park with members of your own household. But how will the police know who’s in your household? How will they police that?

They'll ask for your address.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I’m glad your convinced the schools will go back on June 1st. I’m sure he actually stated (or a newsreader did) that the years to potentially go back are reception; year 1; and year 6 - basically those age groups that define the schools performance. What about the rest of them? My good lady works in a school and her head teacher has already e-mailed the staff to state that he will not open the school if it is not safe.

Clusterf#ck - like I said

I said potentially...

You're wilfully ignoring things now.

[Zlatan]

They'll ask for your address.

How can the evidence that whilst keeping 2m away?

[Zlatan]

I said potentially...

You're wilfully ignoring things now.

Can’t ignore what ain’t there Sid...

Did you miss the part where he said schools would be in June for reopening?

Parents will clearly remain furloughed.

[ksrclaret]

Did you miss the part where he said schools would be in June for reopening?

Parents will clearly remain furloughed.

What if you’ve got two kids who are in, say, Year 3 and Year 8?

Clear as mud, as per.

[tiger76]

Thanks... Always wonder who takes part in these surveys, of which political persuasion, age etc.
Iam over 60,never been asked to take part in one, and I don't know anybody else who has.

I can't speak for the Ipsos survey,but i used to do plenty of YouGov surveys,some of which involved politics.As i recall they did ask for your political views,prior to completing the surveys,now of course,there's no guarantee that people will tell the truth,but most reputable pollsters do try and get a random cross-section of the public,therefore ensuring there isn't an obvious bias.

[FactualFrank]

How can the evidence that whilst keeping 2m away?

By shouting, "WHAT'S YOUR ADDRESS!?"

[EarbyClaret]

The trouble is that was completely ambiguous

People who can go back to work should do so tomorrow.

Setting aside the perfectly legitimate question of childcare. Many workplaces are not ready to accept people back. My own being one. We have furloughed staff who can't wfh but there's no way it would be 'safe' for them to come back tomorrow - primarily because we can't get PPE - despite trying for the last 6 weeks. To say at 7PM on a Sunday night those who can should go back tomorrow morning is quite amazing.

[NewClaret]

What a muddle of a statement by the PM tonight. ‘Stay Alert’? Back to work tomorrow if you can’t work from home (and your employer has about 12 hours to make your workplace COVID safe), and non of this applies outside of England so if you live near a border you need to be careful!

If your employer has not made the appropriate alterations to the workplace you have to question what the hell they’ve been doing for the last 2 months.

But if they had been completely inept at preparing their workplaces for the new normal, they wouldn’t be safe, so people shouldn’t return or be asked to return.

Pretty simple really.

[nyclaret]

They'll ask for your address.

You could all just say the same address?

[NewClaret]

The trouble is that was completely ambiguous

People who can go back to work should do so tomorrow.

Setting aside the perfectly legitimate question of childcare. Many workplaces are not ready to accept people back. My own being one. We have furloughed staff who can't wfh but there's no way it would be 'safe' for them to come back tomorrow - primarily because we can't get PPE - despite trying for the last 6 weeks. To say at 7PM on a Sunday night those who can should go back tomorrow morning is quite amazing.

Is it manufacturing or construction?

He did say “where it is safe to do so” didn’t he?

[Zlatan]

By shouting, "WHAT'S YOUR ADDRESS!?"

Tw@t Frank

[martin_p]

If your employer has not made the appropriate alterations to the workplace you have to question what the hell they’ve been doing for the last 2 months.

But if they had been completely inept at preparing their workplaces for the new normal, they wouldn’t be safe, so people shouldn’t return or be asked to return.

Pretty simple really.

Well that’s one interpretation, but of course that’s the trouble with the government’s advice, most of it is open to interpretation. The PM also mentioned the guidance they’ve been working on for safe workplaces. It’s not even published yet! You’d think that’d be a minimum prerequisite for asking some people to return to work.

[CombatClaret]

That was a complete clustf#ck

Telling people they can go back to work if possible on a Sunday evening, so some sectors won't open until June/July. Why not start with which sectors might be ok to open "If possible".
What about employees who rely on public transport?
What is deemed safe, and where should those safe things be ignored just because it's "not possible".
Total shambles.
"Actively encourage" basically sounds like "threaten to fire" employees back to work.

[EarbyClaret]

"But if they had been completely inept at preparing their workplaces for the new normal, they wouldn’t be safe, so people shouldn’t return or be asked to return."

In some cases possibly but that's too much of a simplification - some of the issues facing employers include:

introduction of shift working
having buildings cleaned between shifts
remove door entry key pads and replacing them with non-touch surfaces
getting people to work by means other than public transport
installing additional hand-sanitizers - and sole of the feet sprays
one way systems on stairs/single use of lifts
provision of PPE (practically impossible outside of essential services)

not that easy to put into effect with the majority of the country in lockdown

[CombatClaret]

"But if they had been completely inept at preparing their workplaces for the new normal, they wouldn’t be safe, so people shouldn’t return or be asked to return."

In some cases possibly but that's too much of a simplification - some of the issues facing employers include:

introduction of shift working
having buildings cleaned between shifts
remove door entry key pads and replacing them with non-touch surfaces
getting people to work by means other than public transport
installing additional hand-sanitizers - and sole of the feet sprays
one way systems on stairs/single use of lifts
provision of PPE (practically impossible outside of essential services)

not that easy to put into effect with the majority of the country in lockdown

All sensible ideas, which can be waved away by 'where possible' and other such non-binding phrases. Now get back to work peasant.

[NewClaret]

That was a complete clustf#ck

Telling people they can go back to work if possible on a Sunday evening, so some sectors won't open until June/July. Why not start with which sectors might be ok to open "If possible".
What about employees who rely on public transport?
What is deemed safe, and where should those safe things be ignored just because it's "not possible".
Total shambles.
"Actively encourage" basically sounds like "threaten to fire" employees back to work.

Just reiterating previous messaging that you can go to work if you can’t work from home, providing you social distance.

Employees can use public transport, but given social distancing measures will reduce capacity, should use car or walk/cycle if possible.

[aggi]

Is it manufacturing or construction?

He did say “where it is safe to do so” didn’t he?

Weirdly I don't think he did.

We said that you should work from home if you can, and only go to work if you must.

We now need to stress that anyone who can’t work from home, for instance those in construction or manufacturing, should be actively encouraged to go to work.

And we want it to be safe for you to get to work. So you should avoid public transport if at all possible – because we must and will maintain social distancing, and capacity will therefore be limited.

So work from home if you can, but you should go to work if you can’t work from home.

And to ensure you are safe at work we have been working to establish new guidance for employers to make workplaces COVID-secure.

There was talk of new guidance but this hasn't actually been announced yet so it will be tricky for workers to rely on it tomorrow.

[ksrclaret]

That was a complete clustf#ck

Telling people they can go back to work if possible on a Sunday evening, so some sectors won't open until June/July. Why not start with which sectors might be ok to open "If possible".
What about employees who rely on public transport?
What is deemed safe, and where should those safe things be ignored just because it's "not possible".
Total shambles.
"Actively encourage" basically sounds like "threaten to fire" employees back to work.

The message could easily have been condensed into 'well we won't be extending your furlough, so you'd better get back to work or you'll be in the sh1t'.

Sickening leadership.

[NewClaret]

Well that’s one interpretation, but of course that’s the trouble with the government’s advice, most of it is open to interpretation. The PM also mentioned the guidance they’ve been working on for safe workplaces. It’s not even published yet! You’d think that’d be a minimum prerequisite for asking some people to return to work.

Of course it will be open to interpretation - he can’t give specific advice for every situation on a 15 minute national broadcast. If people can’t listen to that advice and use their common sense to apply it to their situation, they need to give their head a wobble.

Think the advice on safe workplaces is to keep people 2m apart and regularly clean their hands. Hand sanitiser preferable but not essential.

The virus spreads from people being in close contact or touching surfaces it contains, then touching themselves (hence the need to wash hands regularly). It’s not much more complicated than that.

[taio]

Off course the PM couldn't go into detail in such a short statement.

Which is why telling some people on a Sunday evening they can go back to tomorrow morning is bizarre.

They could have easily deferred this a couple of days to allow some time for people to see more detail and for employers to communicate with their staff.

[randomclaret2]

I have heard the word ' clusterfuck ' before, chiefly on here to be honest , but ' clustfuck ' is a new one to me. Is it just an abbreviation ?

[Zlatan]

Of course it will be open to interpretation - he can’t give specific advice for every situation on a 15 minute national broadcast. If people can’t listen to that advice and use their common sense to apply it to their situation, they need to give their head a wobble.

Think the advice on safe workplaces is to keep people 2m apart and regularly clean their hands. Hand sanitiser preferable but not essential.

The virus spreads from people being in close contact or touching surfaces it contains, then touching themselves (hence the need to wash hands regularly). It’s not much more complicated than that.

Common sense means that the message should not have changed at all

[Zlatan]

I have heard the word ' clusterfuck ' before, chiefly on here to be honest , but ' clustfuck ' is a new one to me. Is it just an abbreviation ?

It’s to be ambiguous - taking his lead from our powers that be, you know, stating something that means something else and then standing by the mistake because applying good sense and admitting a mistake would show you’re weak...

I think it was an autocorrect... may be wrong

[randomclaret2]

A never ending " no change" message would be disastrous

[martin_p]

Of course it will be open to interpretation - he can’t give specific advice for every situation on a 15 minute national broadcast. If people can’t listen to that advice and use their common sense to apply it to their situation, they need to give their head a wobble.

Think the advice on safe workplaces is to keep people 2m apart and regularly clean their hands. Hand sanitiser preferable but not essential.

The virus spreads from people being in close contact or touching surfaces it contains, then touching themselves (hence the need to wash hands regularly). It’s not much more complicated than that.

If you think that’s all it’ll take to keep a workplace safe, especially in manufacturing, then you’re the one that needs to give their head a wobble!

[Zlatan]

A never ending " no change" message would be disastrous

Perhaps but changing to something that is so vague and ambiguous is a bigger mistake

[Tall Paul]

12 hours notice for potentially returning to work. Going to be a busy night for a lot of directors dealing with questions from their employees.

[taio]

A never ending " no change" message would be disastrous

Agree with this. I don't have a problem with the adjustments. The execution and messaging is troubling though.

[martin_p]

A never ending " no change" message would be disastrous

It doesn’t need to be never ending. The R rate may be as high as 0.9 according to the PM tonight, another three weeks to have more confidence it’s around 0.5 or lower would have been a better idea.

[ksrclaret]

A never ending " no change" message would be disastrous

Didn't have to be no change.

But if you're going to change it, you ought to know how you're going to change it before imposing it the next day.

[Zlatan]

I’m so glad Boris told me to stay alert, I was socially distancing on my walk this evening and a coronavirus was walking towards me, without that valuable advice I wouldn’t have known to hide behind a tree until it passed.

[CombatClaret]

I’m so glad Boris told me to stay alert, I was socially distancing on my walk this evening and a coronavirus was walking towards me, without that valuable advice I wouldn’t have known to hide behind a tree until it passed.

Remember If it tries to mug you, wrestle it to the ground.

[Zlatan]

Here’s a thought, why doesn’t Boris stand by his convictions and recall parliament to the House of Commons and get all the MPs to go back to work before having a social experiment with the rest of us?

Before you all go apesh1t I know they can work from home and he said work from home if you can - but that’s the point - why are some people deemed less valuable in terms of their life?

[CombatClaret]

"middle class people who can work from home can now drive and take day trips and working class people in cities are compelled to go to work in unsafe environments but told they aren’t supposed to use public transport"
Good summation from twitter.

[jrgbfc]

I don't think any sensible, decent employer is going to expect everyone back tomorrow morning. I took it to mean go in if you can, or make preparations to be back as soon as you can.

[taio]

"middle class people who can work from home can now drive and take day trips and working class people in cities are compelled to go to work in unsafe environments but told they aren’t supposed to use public transport"
Good summation from twitter.

Far too generalised. But where it does apply, which is often, it is just an unavoidable reality regardless of timing. Or can you think of a way of addressing it prior to a vaccination?

[Zlatan]

C1C71174-FC7B-4BC0-84C0-BBE626EF9115.jpeg (95.06 KiB) Viewed 2517 times