To resign or to get sacked?!

[Max68]

How so? The list looks the same for diabetes (middle group). The only changes I can see are bmi of over 40 has been added to the vulnerable (middle) group.

Not overly sure what the purpose of this middle group is though other than it may raise the level of caution of some people within it. It doesn’t force employers to consider your risks any more than jo public (although hopefully some do), nor allow you access to supermarket online delivery slots or to receive a carb laden box of dubious goodies to enable you to take the social distancing as seriously as advised (unlike the extremely vulnerable shielded people - who justifiably need this). Nor make any other practical difference to most within it. It does allow us to worry more though.

Sorry, that's what I meant. I haven't seen it say "clinically" vulnerable before and I'm sure it reiterates staying name a bit more. Apologies if it causes concern I'll remove the post or a mod can if it's deemed as confusing or over concerning.

 

[KK123]

Sorry, that's what I meant. I haven't seen it say "clinically" vulnerable before and I'm sure it reiterates staying name a bit more. Apologies if it causes concern I'll remove the post or a mod can if it's deemed as confusing or over concerning.

Don't remove the post, what you have said is perfectly valid. I also think it is more specific now to those in this 'clinically vulnerable' group rather than placing them in with the 'normal' group whilst saying stringently follow it. The guidance is saying to THIS GROUP, stay at home if possible and avoid contact with others, this is because like it or not, believe it or not, people with diabetes are more at risk of complications (as yet unknown of course) IF you get it. None of us no matter how well managed we are know how Covid19 might affect us with our dodgy immune systems. Yes, I agree that Employers will have to decide ultimately whether they should be helpful to this group by doing all they can to allow them to work from home for example but I think that this latest information does help us to at least negotiate with our employers to try and lessen the risk. Employers are not being forced to abide by any of the govt rules actually but it would be very hard for them to ignore the govt advice whether it is for those in the extremely clinically vulnerable groups and to a lesser extent those in the clinically vulnerable group. IF it is possible to work from home I think this latest guideline would force employers to consider it seriously. x

 

[KK123]

How so? The list looks the same for diabetes (middle group). The only changes I can see are bmi of over 40 has been added to the vulnerable (middle) group.

Not overly sure what the purpose of this middle group is though other than it may raise the level of caution of some people within it. It doesn’t force employers to consider your risks any more than jo public (although hopefully some do), nor allow you access to supermarket online delivery slots or to receive a carb laden box of dubious goodies to enable you to take the social distancing as seriously as advised (unlike the extremely vulnerable shielded people - who justifiably need this). Nor make any other practical difference to most within it. It does allow us to worry more though.

Hi, I think the change is that they are now giving this advice specifically to this group rather than the public as a whole whilst saying 'follow it more stringently' and specifically saying we should stay at home as much as we can and avoid contact with others. I think it does make employers consider it more seriously whether they then choose to ignore it or not. For me and probably many others it is NOT about getting food boxes etc, that quite rightly is for those that are extremely vulnerable. It is about enabling us to have sensible conversations with our workplace. I also think it does force employers to risk assess those in this clinically vulnerable group far more than a 'normal' person. It gives us something to negotiate with our employers, I am not saying we are all snowflakes, it is simply a fact that we have medical issues above & beyond the general public. It may not apply to those not in work or with jobs where they don't have an issue but lots of us are in occupations where the risk is higher than normal even before you add in an underlying health condition, such as the OP.

 

[Max68]

@KK123 Couldn't have put it better myself. Prior to this update all the information I looked at regarding diabetes (and certain other conditions) was bunched around mere "stringent social distancing" which was a bit ambiguous and placed you pretty much in the "normal public" group. These updates as you say place an emphasis more on "staying at home" as much as possible and "work from home" as much as possible. Whether the work from home part will still be available in my case once schools go back is another matter but for instance at my school all our children have Health Care Plans and therefore all parents were asked if they wanted to send their children in and apparently the school only has four or five attendees. Without fines for not sending kids in I suspect quite a few parents won't send their children in until it is safe to do so so maybe there will be continuous work from home options for some time yet and I also wouldn't be surprised if you see a spike once some children go back in June if the Government sticks with that.

I'm certainly no snowflake. I'm constantly battling with the shall I go in or shall I stay home thoughts. If it were my old job as a van delivery driver I wouldn't have a problem as you can really limit person to person contact doing that job. However with a small school and small school building I have to be realistic. I also know that my job is to keep the children safe and if I can't guarantee that I can keep myself safe that affects my effectiveness. There are thousands of people in a similar position and in various jobs so it will certainly be interesting to see if employers stick with that batch we are in!

 

[HSSS]

@Max68 @KK123 ok I see where you’re coming from. I don’t think the advice has changed - but yes it does seem to have been separated out from the herd and placed alongside the extremely vulnerable/high risk/clinically vulnerable top risk group (the name changes slightly with each review). Hopefully that change of emphasis will help with employers, otherwise we become the ones that fall through the cracks. And no I know it’s not about food boxes. I guess supermarkets elderly and vulnerable hours should be classed as including us even if their online shopping schemes don’t.

The link to how the industry sector specifically mentions and make recommendations for this/our vulnerable group is good. Hope it does so for every industry

 

[Max68]

@HSSS Just to add that I wasn't disagreeing with you, so apologies if I came across that way.

 

[HSSS]

@HSSS Just to add that I wasn't disagreeing with you, so apologies if I came across that way.

Not at all. Just a discussion about how we see things. It’s interesting and as in this case you showed me another way of seeing it I wasn’t seeing before