• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Covid and Work, Covid Advice and General Chat

Tannith said:
So the Govt is going to tell those who are shielding to stay at home more, and to shop at quieter times. Thanks Boris, I never thought of that!
Click to expand...

Unless you work in a school where you must attend, not wear a mask, greet all other staff with pecks on both cheeks, close all doors and windows and eat your lunch without washing your hands as it will only delay you from getting to a classroom. In shops, banks, pubs, restaurants and all other public places you however must be respectful of others wear a full diving suit and pour a large bottle of sanitizer over your head before you will be let in!!
 
Jbicheno said:
After my doctor writing a letter to my school requesting I be allowed to wear a mask I found out today the local authority have declined this request.
Click to expand...

I seem to have started quite a debate on a local FB group. A lot of people going on about scaring kids (really?) and the importance of education but overlooking the feelings of the teacher. However, several replies from teachers mentioned that they felt it was their decision and not the local authority. Do you get sacked for wearing face coverings unless actually teaching when it would probably be quite difficult?
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
I seem to have started quite a debate on a local FB group. A lot of people going on about scaring kids (really?) and the importance of education but overlooking the feelings of the teacher. However, several replies from teachers mentioned that they felt it was their decision and not the local authority. Do you get sacked for wearing face coverings unless actually teaching when it would probably be quite difficult?
Click to expand...

I gave up online debating with others about schools on most sites ages ago as most seemed to think that teachers did nothing since March bar one long holiday and did nothing but moan. What some seem to forget is that it's not just about the teachers, children and staff.

Let's say Parent A has a partner with undiagnosed high blood pressure or some other underlying condition. Parent A wants little Johnny to attend school (understandably) but has absolutely no empathy with the teachers who want to wear masks but can't. Parent A insists teachers shouldn't wear masks. Teacher B then picks up the virus somewhere, maybe even at school. Johnny takes it home unknowingly and whilst he remains asymptomatic both parents get Covid and Parent A's partner ends up in hospital. Will parent A once finding out that it was Teacher B who passed it on then agree non mask wearing was correct? Sure she will !!!!!

Perfect article that explains the absolute shambles going on. It's nothing short of a scandal.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...dren-back-to-school/ar-BB19Ru6p?ocid=msedgdhp
 
Max68 said:
I gave up online debating with others about schools on most sites ages ago as most seemed to think that teachers did nothing since March bar one long holiday and did nothing but moan. What some seem to forget is that it's not just about the teachers, children and staff.

Let's say Parent A has a partner with undiagnosed high blood pressure or some other underlying condition. Parent A wants little Johnny to attend school (understandably) but has absolutely no empathy with the teachers who want to wear masks but can't. Parent A insists teachers shouldn't wear masks. Teacher B then picks up the virus somewhere, maybe even at school. Johnny takes it home unknowingly and whilst he remains asymptomatic both parents get Covid and Parent A's partner ends up in hospital. Will parent A once finding out that it was Teacher B who passed it on then agree non mask wearing was correct? Sure she will !!!!!

Perfect article that explains the absolute shambles going on. It's nothing short of a scandal.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...dren-back-to-school/ar-BB19Ru6p?ocid=msedgdhp
Click to expand...
I read the article in the Guardian and it was heartbreaking. The issue was also covered on Independent Sage by a parent in the same situation who was at her wits end. It's an issue that's a bit like untangling Christmas lights!
The potential affects on children are awful. Psychology this pandemic must be having an affect. For them to be shielded without it being for their own health worries me. However the alternative and knowing they have bought home a virus that has made a family member ill or killed them is equally horrific. One rather grim consequence if this is if it is a single parent involved. What happens to the child then.?
If schools were Covid safe this risk would be drastically reduced. They could be made safer by reducing class numbers and using alternative venues for teaching. That would take resources from the Government which they seem unwilling to supply. Schools were short staffed and financially crippled before the pandemic. Is it any wonder they are struggling now? Even if alternative teaching venues are found,who is going to staff them?
Virtual teaching seems hit and miss. The promised technology for deprived families not appeared. There is as well the issue of engagement with education. It's a system that at best of times fails a large percentage of pupils.
Older pupils are often classed in same group as primary although how those 14 and up spread virus is different. There have been suggestions that if majority of years 10-11 distance taught it would reduce pressure.
University Students are having a dire time. You cant help but feel they were called back to campus for financial reasons. Would Universities survive without the income? Distance learning isnt an issue the Open University have done it exceptionally well for decades!
There is also an article in the Guardian today about how students who are isolating are being overcharged very high prices for basic food packages by the university. Despicable but sums up what is wrong with our attitude at the moment.
Bottom of the pile are those that are vulnerable to the virus. How safe you are reflects all that is unequal about are society. If you are rich you can hide away. Less rich you may work for a responsible employer who has the resources and the morality to protect you.(or at least a healthy fear of being sued if they dont). Front line,zero hours,minimum wage. You are on your own and there will soon be millions of healthy people to replace you. When this happens you will be reliant on a benefit system that has been viewed as breaching your human rights. It is unlikely to cover rent/ mortgage.
Protection of the vulnerable is bandied around in general terms,as is the theory there are just to many vulnerable people for it to be viable. Should some form of shielding be reintroduced I would be surprised if diabetes was given any further consideration. So off we all potentially go swimming into a potential second wave with no lifeguard!
Not for the first time I have to question my growing feeling that not only are those that are high risk not offered protection but at times actively denied it! Why on earth would someone in a teaching environment be forbidden to wear a mask or any other protection? It may not be policy,but actually forbidden?
Why are parents fined for keeping their children at home? Surely in a global pandemic there is room for negotiations and resolution in the short term?
One thing that stood out for me in the article above was the school asking for a letter from the GP and the GP replying it's not an area they get involved in. That leaves the vulnerable person between a rock and a hard place. With a vulnerable parent and a healthy child the GP might not want the child to be restricted.
It is however a situation that affected me and no child involved! My GPs policy is not to be involved with any Covid related work issues,even though as an individual I was at risk. Even my rather dubious employer was taken aback!
Is this a general policy? A government directive.? Surely a GPs role is to protect their patients health?
I think it must also be recognised that are perceptions of others affect how all of this is played out.
The lack of value placed on the ill and infirm. Much is made of covid deaths being in older age groups. Horribly this is sometimes viewed as they hadn't got long anyway.
Apparently recent hospitalizations have shown to be high in BAME males in 50s.
Vulnerable groups are viewed as older or maybe to ill to work. Little is said of those of working age.
Teachers are stereotyped as overpaid and lazy. Students and young people selfish and irresponsible. Those in receipt of benefits wastrels living the life of riley. Of course there are those who fit these stereotypes but sometimes it feels we are all to busy blaming each other to look beyond them.
The media, and in particular social media play a role in this. If nothing else we are drawn towards groups that reflect our views. These views are reinforced and rarely challenged. Time for a rethink.
 
Max68 said:
I would call your Union rather than email as they can be delayed in getting back to you. I would call and be proactive and insist that they help as after all I suspect you pay a premium to be a member.

I don't want to overload you with information as it's down to your Union to do that but two pieces of guidance I have found for you.

From the Joint Union Coronavirus Checklist for Schools.

"Legal obligations on risk assessment for individuals The DfE guidance documents emphasise that employers must comply with health and safety law, which requires them to undertake risk assessments and put in place proportionate control measures and keep them under review. This includes assessing the individual circumstances for each employee before requiring them to attend the workplace. These circumstances include the individual’s own health conditions, alongside any other circumstances which place them at higher risk for other reasons. The degree to which individuals are at risk is affected by their underlying health and also very significantly by age, ethnicity, sex, and other circumstances described in this guidance."

Advice from a Union, not mine, but possibly yours. I have replaced the Union name with just "union" in case it goes against what I can place on here with regard to individual companies etc.

"The “Union” believes that, while the DfE advice remains in place, any students or members of staff who choose to wear a face covering for purposes of personal or collective reassurance should be permitted to do so. The “Union” expects schools and colleges to respect this reasonable position. This reflects the Health and Safety Executive’s advice that if staff choose to wear face coverings, this should be supported by employers. Should any head teacher seek to prevent the wearing of face coverings, the “Union” will support members who wish to secure a reversal of that position."

You have rights in this situation. My resignation is slightly different as to be fair my school did everything within the guidelines to keep me safe with regard to those guidelines. It was my decision that those guidelines don't go far enough, but that's not a criticism of the school, merely the guidelines themselves. For instance if you worked in a shop the Government would now be telling you that you have to wear a mask, whether you want to or not, but schools are different. Why you may ask? It doesn't make sense does it? No it doesn't BUT as I have said before, and these aren't my words but my Unions, the bar for a level of safety in schools is set lower than other businesses purely and simply because if they were set higher schools wouldn't be able to open.

It's something to discuss with your Union but IMO you could wear a mask if you choose. It's for your own safety, "and" others safety. If you got disciplined for that I suspect you could go to Tribunal. Again IMO what Tribunal is going to decide against an employee who has made a decision safety wise for themselves and others when the employer themselves has placed them and others at risk with their policy?!

Obviously no guarantees but you do need to speak to your Union as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much for your advice. It is very much appreciated.
 
Jbicheno said:
Thank you so much for your advice. It is very much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Absolute pleasure no problem at all. If you want any more advice you can always just PM me. I'm no expert at all but probably just a little further down the road than you on this one and am just really passing on what my Union advised.
 
JRT said:
I read the article in the Guardian and it was heartbreaking. The issue was also covered on Independent Sage by a parent in the same situation who was at her wits end. It's an issue that's a bit like untangling Christmas lights!
The potential affects on children are awful. Psychology this pandemic must be having an affect. For them to be shielded without it being for their own health worries me. However the alternative and knowing they have bought home a virus that has made a family member ill or killed them is equally horrific. One rather grim consequence if this is if it is a single parent involved. What happens to the child then.?
If schools were Covid safe this risk would be drastically reduced. They could be made safer by reducing class numbers and using alternative venues for teaching. That would take resources from the Government which they seem unwilling to supply. Schools were short staffed and financially crippled before the pandemic. Is it any wonder they are struggling now? Even if alternative teaching venues are found,who is going to staff them?
Virtual teaching seems hit and miss. The promised technology for deprived families not appeared. There is as well the issue of engagement with education. It's a system that at best of times fails a large percentage of pupils.
Older pupils are often classed in same group as primary although how those 14 and up spread virus is different. There have been suggestions that if majority of years 10-11 distance taught it would reduce pressure.
University Students are having a dire time. You cant help but feel they were called back to campus for financial reasons. Would Universities survive without the income? Distance learning isnt an issue the Open University have done it exceptionally well for decades!
There is also an article in the Guardian today about how students who are isolating are being overcharged very high prices for basic food packages by the university. Despicable but sums up what is wrong with our attitude at the moment.
Bottom of the pile are those that are vulnerable to the virus. How safe you are reflects all that is unequal about are society. If you are rich you can hide away. Less rich you may work for a responsible employer who has the resources and the morality to protect you.(or at least a healthy fear of being sued if they dont). Front line,zero hours,minimum wage. You are on your own and there will soon be millions of healthy people to replace you. When this happens you will be reliant on a benefit system that has been viewed as breaching your human rights. It is unlikely to cover rent/ mortgage.
Protection of the vulnerable is bandied around in general terms,as is the theory there are just to many vulnerable people for it to be viable. Should some form of shielding be reintroduced I would be surprised if diabetes was given any further consideration. So off we all potentially go swimming into a potential second wave with no lifeguard!
Not for the first time I have to question my growing feeling that not only are those that are high risk not offered protection but at times actively denied it! Why on earth would someone in a teaching environment be forbidden to wear a mask or any other protection? It may not be policy,but actually forbidden?
Why are parents fined for keeping their children at home? Surely in a global pandemic there is room for negotiations and resolution in the short term?
One thing that stood out for me in the article above was the school asking for a letter from the GP and the GP replying it's not an area they get involved in. That leaves the vulnerable person between a rock and a hard place. With a vulnerable parent and a healthy child the GP might not want the child to be restricted.
It is however a situation that affected me and no child involved! My GPs policy is not to be involved with any Covid related work issues,even though as an individual I was at risk. Even my rather dubious employer was taken aback!
Is this a general policy? A government directive.? Surely a GPs role is to protect their patients health?
I think it must also be recognised that are perceptions of others affect how all of this is played out.
The lack of value placed on the ill and infirm. Much is made of covid deaths being in older age groups. Horribly this is sometimes viewed as they hadn't got long anyway.
Apparently recent hospitalizations have shown to be high in BAME males in 50s.
Vulnerable groups are viewed as older or maybe to ill to work. Little is said of those of working age.
Teachers are stereotyped as overpaid and lazy. Students and young people selfish and irresponsible. Those in receipt of benefits wastrels living the life of riley. Of course there are those who fit these stereotypes but sometimes it feels we are all to busy blaming each other to look beyond them.
The media, and in particular social media play a role in this. If nothing else we are drawn towards groups that reflect our views. These views are reinforced and rarely challenged. Time for a rethink.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have put it better myself, as your post sums it up perfectly.

The government just don't think out of the box. They keep throwing money at it, which we will all have to pay back, without even looking at other possibilities.

I've said before they had months to create a database of who the vulnerable staff and children were in schools and set up a nationwide online teaching service. I could have supported a teacher online in Manchester on Monday, Devon on Tuesday and so forth. Online LSA's don't teach, it's merely as safeguard support so easy to do elsewhere.

Then again as I have said before different rules could have been placed on private pensions. Let people take money out to safeguard themselves if they wish. Then it's their own money they are using to support themselves.

Have an opt out scheme for shielding or protecting. As JRT says there will be millions of vulnerable who are at risk, far too many, but not all are at risk in the workplace and not all want protecting. I have a friend who works on his own. His team are divided into small groups but they don't have any contact with each other all day. If I did his job I wouldn't be resigning. Others are happy with talking the risk and don't want to be shielded. Fair enough, it's personal choice. Tailor the shielding/protecting individually. Create an opt out or opt in system.

GP's must be allowed to make decisions to protect their patients. Why are GP's forbidden to end someone's life when asked and with dignity when a person has no chance of recovery and in vast pain but at the same time can just brush off someone's request for a certificate to protect them from a virus that could kill them? It doesn't make sense. One the one hand the government says it wants to protect people and get infection rates down but instructs GP's to not protect those who need protecting?!?! Confused? So am I!!!

I googled what a GP's job is. Part of it stated. "They focus on the health of the whole person combining physical, psychological and social aspects of care." The Guardian article suggests not!!

So many possible alternatives to just throwing money at the problem. It's not rocket science to realise that to avoid a crisis then do everything you can to stop that crisis starting in the first place .
 
I don't blame the GP's in any of this. They didn't make the rules or have any involvement in the decision making.

My local surgery are very frustrated with the situation. They have posted in the local news website about the limited flu jabs available as they had to order them in January, before all this kicked off, and are not being allowed to order more for the increase in those needing them.

They are also fighting to even get the ones ordered, due to shortages. It's not like the government didn't have 9 months to deal with the winter flu season, is it.
 
lucylocket61 said:
I don't blame the GP's in any of this. They didn't make the rules or have any involvement in the decision making.

My local surgery are very frustrated with the situation. They have posted in the local news website about the limited flu jabs available as they had to order them in January, before all this kicked off, and are not being allowed to order more for the increase in those needing them.

They are also fighting to even get the ones ordered, due to shortages. It's not like the government didn't have 9 months to deal with the winter flu season, is it.
Click to expand...

Oh absolutely I don't blame them at all, they are being hamstrung like many others by this inept government and aren't able to do their job properly.
 
JRT said:
but sometimes it feels we are all to busy blaming each other to look beyond them
Click to expand...
Well it seems to be the plan, all be so busy blaming someone else for what we see as failings that no one blames those in charge making the decisions.
 
lucylocket61 said:
I don't blame the GP's in any of this. They didn't make the rules or have any involvement in the decision making.

My local surgery are very frustrated with the situation. They have posted in the local news website about the limited flu jabs available as they had to order them in January, before all this kicked off, and are not being allowed to order more for the increase in those needing them.

They are also fighting to even get the ones ordered, due to shortages. It's not like the government didn't have 9 months to deal with the winter flu season, is it.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to get a flu jab this year. There is a risk in going to a health care facility to get it. I'll wait til I've had the so far non existent covid jab before I go out. Yet the Govt has been saying it plans to vaccinate far more people than usual against flu. How if there's a shortage of vaccine?
 
School outbreaks in September are 3000% higher, per day, than in June and July when social distancing was in place.

For the corresponding time period, community transmission is only 3.69 times larger.
66E33897-034B-4715-91D3-3D27828201F1.jpeg
 
HSSS said:
School outbreaks in September are 3000% higher, per day, than in June and July when social distancing was in place.

For the corresponding time period, community transmission is only 3.69 times larger.
View attachment 44523
Click to expand...
Trump and his followers not wearing masks: irresponsible
Teachers and schoolchildren not wearing masks: unimpeded learning (as if)
Oh for some joined up logical thinking behind govt directives
 
Regarding home schooling My grandson has recently been in contact with an online group from what was his secondary school until for health reasons and the schools total lack of cooperation we took him out of the school and home schooled him of the pupils that were in his year at that school only two have made it to university my grandson and one other.
 
I read a really sad news story earlier regarding this awfully tragic avoidable death of a baby in hospital. Part of the story read "The CQC said in a statement: “The trust is charged with exposing **** and his mother, *****, to significant risk of avoidable harm.


Does anyone know if "exposing a patient to significant risk of avoidable harm" applies only to children in a hospital setting? If not then the pressure of the Government on GP's to "not help" vulnerable patients in any way could theoretically have major implications in the coming months.
 
Max68 said:
I read a really sad news story earlier regarding this awfully tragic avoidable death of a baby in hospital. Part of the story read "The CQC said in a statement: “The trust is charged with exposing **** and his mother, *****, to significant risk of avoidable harm.


Does anyone know if "exposing a patient to significant risk of avoidable harm" applies only to children in a hospital setting? If not then the pressure of the Government on GP's to "not help" vulnerable patients in any way could theoretically have major implications in the coming months.
Click to expand...

Max, is the case you cite the mother who received shocking ant-natal care, a late, then botched Caesarean, the fearful aftercare?

Horribly tragic.
 
DCUKMod said:
Max, is the case you cite the mother who received shocking ant-natal care, a late, then botched Caesarean, the fearful aftercare?

Horribly tragic.
Click to expand...


Yes seems to be the one. Hadn't heard of it before but absolutely horrific. First time apparently an NHS trust is being prosecuted for the unsafe care of patients.
 
Max68 said:
Yes seems to be the one. Hadn't heard of it before but absolutely horrific. First time apparently an NHS trust is being prosecuted for the unsafe care of patients.
Click to expand...

By the sounds of it, it's a systemic failure of almost every single aspect of this poor lady and her no deceased son's care.
 
Back
Top