Coronavirus (3 Viewers)

  • Thread starter Thread starter AGinAg (37)
  • Start date Start date

Are you worried about contracting coronavirus?

  • Yes, I am absolutely terrified

    Votes: 12 15.6%

  • Yes, I am slightly concerned

    Votes: 35 45.5%

  • I am neither concerned or unconcerned

    Votes: 7 9.1%

  • No, I am slightly unconcerned

    Votes: 6 7.8%

  • No, I am totally unconcerned

    Votes: 6 7.8%

  • Bring back the old poll

    Votes: 3 3.9%

  • Charlotte Awbrey tits out doing the Macarena

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • I believe VoR is evil

    Votes: 11 14.3%
  • Total voters
    77
One of my team has just tested positive. He’s only 31 and suffering quite badly, but mostly I’m worried because both of his parents are extremely vulnerable and he’s their carer. Christ knows where he got it from - I suspect his kids aged 7 and 4.
 
RJN said:
This all makes me rethink how I think about getting sick in general. I've never wanted to get the flu, but I also never really worried about the implications of spreading it. Same with colds/viruses etc. None of those are as deadly as COVID, but spreading any kind of disease can still lead to other's getting very sick/dying. I hope this leads everyone to reconsider going into work/school/public while sick at all
Click to expand...
I never worried about all that until one time I came in to work with a bad cough just to be a trooper and fight through it. My friend had to yell at me to go home as her mother-in-law was terminally ill in hospital at the time and it could have easily been passed on between us.
 
I got a track and trace notification to isolate for 10 days yesterday. I've narrowed the exposure down to standing in a queue outside the village shop on Boxing Day. :manson:
 
Meanwhile I just got another email from my Dad as he has 2 spare tickets for the Kew Gardens lights thing on Saturday and wants us to come (immensely underwhelming when I went a few years ago). Again, not breaking the rules, but I swear they do something every week to try to find ways to go out somewhere. The only reason they have the spare tickets is because their friends (aged about 75) have just decided to flat out break the rules to travel to Brighton and visit their grandchildren :manson:
 
I imagine tomorrow will have a huge peak in deaths as we’ve just had a weekend straddled by two bank holidays.
 
Ellie said:
Meanwhile I just got another email from my Dad as he has 2 spare tickets for the Kew Gardens lights thing on Saturday and wants us to come (immensely underwhelming when I went a few years ago). Again, not breaking the rules, but I swear they do something every week to try to find ways to go out somewhere. The only reason they have the spare tickets is because their friends (aged about 75) have just decided to flat out break the rules to travel to Brighton and visit their grandchildren :manson:
Click to expand...

Surely there is no way the Kew thing is going ahead? How is that compliant with restrictions?
 
Is Boris doing a press conference tomorrow? I have heard rumours of a TIER 5! Just put the country in FULL FUCKING LOCKDOWN, you BUFFOON.
 
There was an outdoor 'Winter Wonderland' here that opened while we were in tier 3, to much criticism. It was due to run until January 3rd, but ended up closing December 15th (the dat before we went down to tier 2) due to fears about crowding in the surrounding area.
 
Seasons gREETings said:
Is Boris doing a press conference tomorrow? I have heard rumours of a TIER 5! Just put the country in FULL FUCKING LOCKDOWN, you BUFFOON.
Click to expand...

The date is 6th of April 2021. Boris Johnson has just announced that Cheadle and North Wokingham are to be placed in Tier 67, which means only one breath a minute allowed and you must change your socks every time you take a step. Zoom meetings cancelled in case of inadvertent electronic viral loads.
 
Ellie said:
It’s absolutely going ahead because it’s outside. They’ve just removed any benches around the area so no one can sit down. I just called him to politely decline.
Click to expand...

We’re allowed outside for exercise with one other person but I think Kew are really taking the piss with their definition here. If nothing else, I think it sends a bad message.
 
Tetris-Rock said:
We’re allowed outside for exercise with one other person but I think Kew are really taking the piss with their definition here. If nothing else, I think it sends a bad message.
Click to expand...
Definitely. The Tier 4 message is to stay home at all times unless you need to leave for work, exercise or going out for essentials, which should be the same as a proper lockdown.
 
RJN said:
I hope this leads everyone to reconsider going into work/school/public while sick at all
Click to expand...

This is in the hands of leaders and management, the only reason people schlep themselves to work when ill is that they either can't afford not to or their employers have LOUD unspoken rules against it. We've all called in sick before and been told "Oh this really leaves us short", "Do you think you could be in later today?" It's absurd.
 
Last edited:
vespertine said:
This is in the hands of leaders and management, the only reason people schlep themselves to work when ill is that they either can't afford not to or their employers have LOUD unspoken rules against it. We've all called in sick before and been told "Oh this really leaves us short", "Do you think you could be in later today?" It's absurd.
Click to expand...
We have managerial policies and guidelines about multiple runs of sickness within a certain period. The general one is a system trigger if you have more than one block of sickness within 13 weeks, and it counts one day the same as any longer period, so if you have one day off sick and then another 12 weeks later, it triggers to be put on your HR record for a “verbal warning”, then written warnings and various other meetings and investigations about being signed off.

There are loads of further guidelines but that’s the first basic one. What a lot of managers hardly ever do is realise that they can override a trigger at their own discretion and take no further action if they can just be arsed to write a few lines to justify their decision, which I often do when it’s obvious that a good employee is not taking the piss. A lot of others go straight by the book which is ridiculous.
 
Suomi said:
And Kew Gardens is so boring, wow a flower
Click to expand...

:o I love Kew!

I think that regarding sickness absence and not spreading it, etc, I think that it will sadly become another two tier thing where those in public facing service-based roles yet again lose out.

I think in offices, at least to begin with, there will be a increased culture of not coming in whilst sick. However, rather than taking sick days, people will instead be encouraged to work from home rather than coming in and spreading it. There are definite benefits to this... I’ve definitely had those sick days where I probably COULD do a bit of work but couldn’t bear the commute or couldn’t quite hack a full day. There are also disadvantages though, such as people being ill for longer because they’re working at home rather than letting themselves actually rest.

I could see that absence policy as Ellie’s work really fucking over someone who gets excruciatingly painful period pain.
 
vespertine said:
This is in the hands of leaders and management, the only reason people schlep themselves to work when ill is that they either can't afford not to or their employers have LOUD unspoken rules against it. We've all called in sick before and been told "Oh this really leaves us short", "Do you think you could be in later today?" It's absurd.
Click to expand...

You’re completely right. If I stay home sick, I don’t get paid for that day. So I’ve gone to work with colds in the past. We need government regulations to change that.
 
vespertine said:
This is in the hands of leaders and management, the only reason people schlep themselves to work when ill is that they either can't afford not to or their employers have LOUD unspoken rules against it. We've all called in sick before and been told "Oh this really leaves us short", "Do you think you could be in later today?" It's absurd.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. I can see that for certain types of work, but at my work it's people failing to take personal responsibility. As a manager i can't literally force people out of the building but i'll always suggest people go home or not come in when clearly unwell. I've been guilty of it myself - my manager isn't forcing me to work in any way but I feel like i'm "not ill enough" or something and just plod on.

Ellie said:
We have managerial policies and guidelines about multiple runs of sickness within a certain period. The general one is a system trigger if you have more than one block of sickness within 13 weeks, and it counts one day the same as any longer period, so if you have one day off sick and then another 12 weeks later, it triggers to be put on your HR record for a “verbal warning”, then written warnings and various other meetings and investigations about being signed off.
Click to expand...

Genuinely when i worked for Tesco years ago they introduced a policy where if you're sick for more than 5% of your contracted hours in a three month period, you'd go onto a verbal warning.

I only worked one day a week at the time, so a single sick day would put me onto a verbal. They soon dropped that policy.
 
Last edited:
Reindieer said:
Genuinely when i worked for Tesco years ago they introduced a policy where if you're sick for more than 5% of your contracted hours in a three month period, you'd go onto a verbal warning.
Click to expand...

When I worked with Lloyds TSB, it was 3% in 6 months. Which is less than a week. So if you were off for a full week, there was a "hearing" when they discussed if you really were sick enough to be off for a whole week.

Again, it's almost as if this insistence that everyone work themselves to the bone regardless is now creating a different type of harvest.
 
Obviously the Oxford news is WONDERFUL.

I also see with its approval that the plan has switched to getting as many people their first dose as possible FIRST, with a wait of up to 12 weeks for the 2nd one.

I don’t know if it’s just the CHANGE but I feel a bit uneasy about it... can somebody persuade me that it’s actually a good plan? It just feels like there’s more scope for it to go wrong and we’ll be waiting even longer before ANYONE is immune...
 
Is the Oxford vaccination also two jags? For some reason I assumed it was only one.
 
Pingu said:
I also see with its approval that the plan has switched to getting as many people their first dose as possible FIRST, with a wait of up to 12 weeks for the 2nd one.

I don’t know if it’s just the CHANGE but I feel a bit uneasy about it... can somebody persuade me that it’s actually a good plan? It just feels like there’s more scope for it to go wrong and we’ll be waiting even longer before ANYONE is immune...
Click to expand...
The explanation for this (and justification of why it's a good course of action) is needed urgently, as Pfizer have come out and said (factually) that "there is no data to support this approach".
 
This thread makes for grim reading. Those poor nurses and doctors.


Is there any word on what’s happening with university students? Are they still expected back in January?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top Bottom