|
Post by Tim on Apr 13, 2021 7:53:49 GMT
I'll be leaving the issue to our HR bod! Perhaps the lure of some company-funded lunches will help my colleague change their mind (I'm a generous manager and occasionally treat them to a nice lunch with a drink . Go me, eh?).
|
|
|
Post by chipbutty on Apr 13, 2021 8:47:42 GMT
If everyone who is “ at risk “ (hate the expression, but you know what I mean) and everyone who wants the vaccine has been vaccinated, why would someone who does not want vaccination cause even the slightest concern to someone who has been vaccinated ?
Even though the vaccine is not 100% effective and even though it’s not proven to completely reduce transmission between vaccinated people, I think you need to consider the percentages at work before collective excrement is rendered unlocatable.
In simplistic terms, the actual percentage of likelihood that a vaccinated individual will pick up Covid, transmit it to another vaccinated individual who will then go on to be hospitalised and killed by Covid is miniscule – by which I mean you have more chance of being sent to play a harp when crossing the road, or walking down the stairs.
The level of general tolerance (nay – acceptance) towards the wholesale denial of basic liberties without clarity of intended reinstatement continues to amaze and horrify in equal measure.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 13, 2021 9:24:18 GMT
The individual risk is low but collectively the risk is still enough to cause major disruption to the NHS. That said I don’t support mandatory vaccination for the general population or vaccine passports.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Apr 13, 2021 9:30:18 GMT
If everyone who is “ at risk “ (hate the expression, but you know what I mean) and everyone who wants the vaccine has been vaccinated, why would someone who does not want vaccination cause even the slightest concern to someone who has been vaccinated ? Even though the vaccine is not 100% effective and even though it’s not proven to completely reduce transmission between vaccinated people, I think you need to consider the percentages at work before collective excrement is rendered unlocatable. In simplistic terms, the actual percentage of likelihood that a vaccinated individual will pick up Covid, transmit it to another vaccinated individual who will then go on to be hospitalised and killed by Covid is miniscule – by which I mean you have more chance of being sent to play a harp when crossing the road, or walking down the stairs. The level of general tolerance (nay – acceptance) towards the wholesale denial of basic liberties without clarity of intended reinstatement continues to amaze and horrify in equal measure. I don't disagree with you but I am not going to put my business at financial risk if my experts tell me that I could be sued or pursued for acting outwith their guidance. Blame the Courts and those who write the laws that protect employees from apparently unscrupulous employers.
|
|
|
Post by chipbutty on Apr 13, 2021 9:37:12 GMT
Surely the " risk " is the percentage of " at risk " individuals who will not take the vaccine. This is a far more relevant value to understand and model - especially given the quoted percentages of hospitalisations and deaths by age and underlying conditions relative to assumed total Covid infections ?
I am not hearing much by the way of a significant drive to increase NHS capacity (buildings, beds, nurses, doctors) which suggests that the lockdown toolset is not going to be put back in the shed anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by garry on Apr 13, 2021 9:39:33 GMT
The individual risk is low but collectively the risk is still enough to cause major disruption to the NHS. That said I don’t support mandatory vaccination for the general population or vaccine passports. Really? How is the collective risk still enough to cause a major disruption to the nhs when we know that the unvaccinated groups (healthy under 50s) are at an incredibly low risk of getting hospitalised or dying. In what realistic scenario can the nhs get overwhelmed?
|
|
|
Post by garry on Apr 13, 2021 10:04:28 GMT
As an employer, this is a really difficult situation. You have a duty of care to all your staff and to allow unvaccinated staff to come to the work place MAY increase the risk of vaccinated people taking Covid home or into the wider community. Our HR people are currently drawing up new guidelines but their current advice is that only vaccinated staff should be allowed to return to the office at the moment. The Government guidelines in Scotland still haven't set a date for offices returning to work. As I typed this post, an e-mail popped up in my inbox from our HR provider with a new online tracker tool to record who has had the vaccine, provide certificates for customers that our staff have been vaccinated and also with videos to help encourage staff to get the vaccine as soon as possible. Unless there is going to be a Covid exemption for the duty of care an employer has, I don't see how those without a vaccination (unless it is for good medical reasons) can be allowed to carry on as normal, at least not in the short to medium term and not before Covid is no longer a world threat. That really depresses me John. You paint a picture of a world where no risk is acceptable. The problem isn’t Covid, it’s what comes next once the expectation of zero risk is rooted in people’s minds - a bad winter flu and we’re all locked down, saving the nhs, crippling the economy. As an accountant I’m sure you know businesses and sectors that are in a death spiral due to covid - probably using furlough and grants to extend their life a little. The more barriers we put in the way of normal life resuming, the more businesses will go to the wall. I take my duty of care responsibilities seriously. First and foremost, anyone working for me knows I’ll move mountains to keep them all in well paid jobs because a theoretical risk of covid gets trumped by a real world risk of not being able to pay your mortgage. As for your HR provider app, I admire their innovation, but that’s just a business exploiting a perceived market pain point.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Apr 13, 2021 11:05:28 GMT
If everyone who is “ at risk “ (hate the expression, but you know what I mean) and everyone who wants the vaccine has been vaccinated, why would someone who does not want vaccination cause even the slightest concern to someone who has been vaccinated ? Even though the vaccine is not 100% effective and even though it’s not proven to completely reduce transmission between vaccinated people, I think you need to consider the percentages at work before collective excrement is rendered unlocatable. In simplistic terms, the actual percentage of likelihood that a vaccinated individual will pick up Covid, transmit it to another vaccinated individual who will then go on to be hospitalised and killed by Covid is miniscule – by which I mean you have more chance of being sent to play a harp when crossing the road, or walking down the stairs. The level of general tolerance (nay – acceptance) towards the wholesale denial of basic liberties without clarity of intended reinstatement continues to amaze and horrify in equal measure. I don't disagree with you but I am not going to put my business at financial risk if my experts tell me that I could be sued or pursued for acting outwith their guidance. Blame the Courts and those who write the laws that protect employees from apparently unscrupulous employers. Surely you are far more likely to face legal action for discrimination then you are for peddling COVID around the office.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Apr 13, 2021 11:18:41 GMT
Garry, I am perhaps reaching the point in life when I want to protect what I have and provide for the future, so risk taking (of the kind I don't have some control over) is something I am starting to stay away from. I have a few clients who are hanging on by their finger nails and will probably not survive. I have others who have already thrown in the towel and some who have thrived. I agree that further restrictions are not going to help anyone but for the reasons above I am not going to put myself in a position where someone could sue me for the death of a loved one.
Over the years I have seen many people and businesses sacrificed on the H&S altar for the stupidity and blatant disregard of company policy and rules by employees and others. It appears the only way you can avoid liability is to have a supervisor for every member of staff - a financial impossibility. It doesn't help when the body bringing the charges for H&S breaches is also the one in receipt of the fines for those breaches.
I am fortunate that I can have most of my staff working from home but if the Govt want people back at work they need to make it clear that the law does not support claims against employers for someone catching Covid in the workplace.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Apr 13, 2021 11:21:54 GMT
Surely you are far more likely to face legal action for discrimination then you are for peddling COVID around the office. Not according to our HR advisors. In any case most contracts of employment allow an employer to change the place of work of an employee, so until HR says differently, the place of work for any unvaccinated staff is their home.
|
|
|
Post by PG on Apr 13, 2021 11:35:43 GMT
The vaccination for work debate. My libertarian tendencies tell me that in this case people who say they have a right not to get vaccinated all too easily forget that with that right comes responsibilities too. A responsibility not to infect others. OK, we can debate how much that risk is and what are the chances etc, but if society at large generally decides that the risk is too high, then it is beholden on people to be good citizens and get vaccinated. Same goes for groups of people for any other reason who often are the first to claim they have it bad from society. Well, if you want to be part of society, get vaccinated. When I read about care home workers, for example, who won't get vaccinated it makes we wonder just what planet they live on.
Liken it to washing your hands after going to the toilet. You have a right not to wash your hands, make yourself ill if you want to. But that ignores your responsibility not to pass germs and diseases to other people. So, wash your hands please.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 13, 2021 11:59:37 GMT
The individual risk is low but collectively the risk is still enough to cause major disruption to the NHS. That said I don’t support mandatory vaccination for the general population or vaccine passports. Really? How is the collective risk still enough to cause a major disruption to the nhs when we know that the unvaccinated groups (healthy under 50s) are at an incredibly low risk of getting hospitalised or dying. In what realistic scenario can the nhs get overwhelmed? In many realistic scenarios. All the vaccines have different rates of effectiveness but if you're generous and say they're on average 80% effective then you've got 20% of the population who are still vulnerable. Vaccines have been proven reduce deaths from COVID to zero in some cases but they haven't done the same with hospitalisations. So we may still see hospitals stuffed with COVID patients who don't die, but require resource and capacity whilst they're being treated. a small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number and that is the number of people who could still end up in hospital with COVID requiring treatment. In some parts of the country it's enough to overwhelm services.
The second problem is that vaccine hesitancy isn't evenly distributed across the population, it tends to exist in pockets and there is a real issue with particular population groups. So you have localised transmissions and a higher rate of morbidity but also a higher rate of hospitalisation.
The main problem we've got is who is protecting who. The NHS or the public? If the government is going to be blamed for every death then the government has to use the levers at its disposal to do what it can to mitigate deaths, the NHS will carry on doing whatever it wants regardless but always in need or more money.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Apr 13, 2021 14:19:44 GMT
The individual risk is low but collectively the risk is still enough to cause major disruption to the NHS. That said I don’t support mandatory vaccination for the general population or vaccine passports. Really? How is the collective risk still enough to cause a major disruption to the nhs when we know that the unvaccinated groups (healthy under 50s) are at an incredibly low risk of getting hospitalised or dying. In what realistic scenario can the nhs get overwhelmed? Isn't there a strong chance the virus will mutate so that those currently at low risk will soon become at higher risk?
|
|
|
Post by garry on Apr 13, 2021 14:21:17 GMT
Really? How is the collective risk still enough to cause a major disruption to the nhs when we know that the unvaccinated groups (healthy under 50s) are at an incredibly low risk of getting hospitalised or dying. In what realistic scenario can the nhs get overwhelmed? In many realistic scenarios. All the vaccines have different rates of effectiveness but if you're generous and say they're on average 80% effective then you've got 20% of the population who are still vulnerable. Vaccines have been proven reduce deaths from COVID to zero in some cases but they haven't done the same with hospitalisations. So we may still see hospitals stuffed with COVID patients who don't die, but require resource and capacity whilst they're being treated. a small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number and that is the number of people who could still end up in hospital with COVID requiring treatment. In some parts of the country it's enough to overwhelm services.
The second problem is that vaccine hesitancy isn't evenly distributed across the population, it tends to exist in pockets and there is a real issue with particular population groups. So you have localised transmissions and a higher rate of morbidity but also a higher rate of hospitalisation.
The main problem we've got is who is protecting who. The NHS or the public? If the government is going to be blamed for every death then the government has to use the levers at its disposal to do what it can to mitigate deaths, the NHS will carry on doing whatever it wants regardless but always in need or more money.
Aren’t you assuming a linear relationship between percentage of population who are vulnerable and percentage who will get ill. Surely herd immunity kicks in at some point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 14:22:59 GMT
There is also the potential for long covid to create a whole new class of disability. Expensive.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 13, 2021 15:32:22 GMT
In many realistic scenarios. All the vaccines have different rates of effectiveness but if you're generous and say they're on average 80% effective then you've got 20% of the population who are still vulnerable. Vaccines have been proven reduce deaths from COVID to zero in some cases but they haven't done the same with hospitalisations. So we may still see hospitals stuffed with COVID patients who don't die, but require resource and capacity whilst they're being treated. a small percentage of a huge number is still a huge number and that is the number of people who could still end up in hospital with COVID requiring treatment. In some parts of the country it's enough to overwhelm services.
The second problem is that vaccine hesitancy isn't evenly distributed across the population, it tends to exist in pockets and there is a real issue with particular population groups. So you have localised transmissions and a higher rate of morbidity but also a higher rate of hospitalisation.
The main problem we've got is who is protecting who. The NHS or the public? If the government is going to be blamed for every death then the government has to use the levers at its disposal to do what it can to mitigate deaths, the NHS will carry on doing whatever it wants regardless but always in need or more money.
Aren’t you assuming a linear relationship between percentage of population who are vulnerable and percentage who will get ill. Surely herd immunity kicks in at some point. I'm assuming within a large population there is a small percentage that is still sufficiently large be a problem to NHS services. If all this is about protecting the NHS the question that really needs to be asked is why aren't we reforming the NHS?
Herd immunity kicks in when enough of the population can no longer act as a vector therefore disrupting transmission. It's thought that the infectiousness of COVID is such that the herd immunity rate would need to be higher than other illness. And this is the part where herd immunity unfolds, to hit those higher rates you need to vaccinate more of the population, children in particular. You also have the problem that children generally aren't vaccinated and are quite a mobile vector. Then there's a further issue when you have whole sections of the herd who aren't vaccinated at all and have no immunity so the virus just runs rampant in those communities.
However, even though we might not have hit (or may depending on your modelling) herd immunity, the risk is becoming more reduced which is why things are opening up gradually now but with the expectation that rates could still rise though should be manageable as the vaccine rollout progresses.
|
|
|
Post by garry on Apr 13, 2021 15:52:35 GMT
Aren’t you assuming a linear relationship between percentage of population who are vulnerable and percentage who will get ill. Surely herd immunity kicks in at some point. I'm assuming within a large population there is a small percentage that is still sufficiently large be a problem to NHS services. If all this is about protecting the NHS the question that really needs to be asked is why aren't we reforming the NHS?
I agree. I’ve been a long term supporter of the nhs and would hold it up as an example of what was great about our country. When I lived in the states i thought the three things that stood out about the UK compared to North America were our police force, the bbc and the nhs. For me, our police force is the only one of those three that I’d still be proud of. The BBC is some liberal, virtue signalling shit show and the NHS is an inefficient self serving monster.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 13, 2021 15:57:50 GMT
The American healthcare system is one extreme but the NHS is the other. A European style insurance model would be better for everyone but it'll never happen. The way the NHS brand is being managed and appropriated reminds me a lot of that of Nazi Germany.
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 13, 2021 19:55:47 GMT
Well, I've been working in an office with quite a lot of other people for the last 8 months. Very few of those people have been vaccinated, I am one of the oldest people currently working there.
There is absolutely no way that an employer can prevent an employee who does not have Covid from attending their place of work (assuming that the workplace is open and the employee wants to work there). The employer has a duty to make their workplace 'Covid secure' with appropriate social distancing and sanitising protocols etc and the employee must self-certify that they have not currently got Covid or have currently tested positive for it. If they do have it or have tested positive then they can only return to work after the appropriate period of isolation etc.
So absolutely no way can anyone discriminate against unvaccinated employees. As long as you have made your workplace Covid secure, people can, and should, work in their offices either if they choose to, or if their employer expects them to - unless and until their contract of employment states otherwise.
I'm lucky that my principal team member also wants to be in the office and recognises all the benefits of so doing. Increased productivity, efficiency, innovation, mentoring and banter.
Working from home as a matter of routine is utterly shit in my opinion. I'd sooner retire.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 13, 2021 20:08:50 GMT
Proving where you’d picked up COVID would be next to impossible, surely?
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 13, 2021 20:11:34 GMT
Indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Apr 14, 2021 7:52:47 GMT
I'm lucky that my principal team member also wants to be in the office and recognises all the benefits of so doing. Increased productivity, efficiency, innovation, mentoring and banter. Working from home as a matter of routine is utterly shit in my opinion. I'd sooner retire. Yes and no. I'd say that for at least the first 6 months of WFH I was way more productive simply because I wasn't in a room with 30 other people, many of whom would stop by for a chat on their way to the bog or the kitchen. Or those that ask an inane question because they're too lazy to work it out for themself and spot you in the distance as the person to go and ask/annoy. I then went through a stage of probably being less productive as I was clearly missing being in the office but have now come round to the idea that I will probably work a 50:50 split but on an ad hoc basis. My firm has managed to make 2 acquisitions where the initial conversations took place pre-lockdown but all the hard work has happened during it and from a completion of just pre-Christmas I think we're doing a reasonable job of integration, albeit everyone is making allowances for not meeting up face to face with new colleagues. There have been times when meetings have dragged on or had to be reconvened when having it in the office would've seen a faster resolution and many people now copy half the organisation into emails 'just in case' plus you're right about the mentoring aspect but I would dispute the assertion that being in the office full-time is wholly beneficial.
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 17, 2021 19:25:15 GMT
Tim - as ever, most things are nuanced and what's right for one person/one job may not be right for another person/another job.
Both for myself and my principal team member, we are definitely more productive and more efficient when we are both working in the office, sat at our desks which are between 2 and 3 metres apart. I have another team member who is working entirely from home at the moment (their choice for now and I cannot compel them to work in the office) and while this is OK for both parties it isn't as good as I would like and I would prefer them to be in the office more often.
I think that being in the office full time has its occasional drawbacks, and having a little more flexibility to work at home now and again is a good thing. In fact, I took advantage of this myself on Tuesday and worked at home all day because I was expecting a delivery. Prior to the pandemic I would have almost certainly spent the day working in the office and probably arranged to collect the item on a Saturday morning from wherever it was then held. But nowadays I feel much more able just to tell my boss that I'll be working from home that day, with the reason why.
That said, I disliked spending the day working at home and was very pleased to go back to the office on Wednesday. Horses for courses to some extent.
|
|
|
Post by Eff One on Apr 21, 2021 11:26:31 GMT
Had my first jab yesterday afternoon and initially thought I had got off lightly. Aside from a sore arm, I had no ill effects by the time I went to bed at midnight.
No such luck today. My arm is really quite painful - I struggle to lift it above my shoulder - and I had to log off work after an hour with the usual symptoms. Shivers, aches, head fog etc. It's so common with the AstraZeneca jab that our HR department have created a new category for it when reporting absence.
|
|
|
Post by Blarno on Apr 21, 2021 11:48:59 GMT
First jab booked in for Friday afternoon. I didn't realise they were getting to the 40-45 age group so quickly.
|
|
|
Post by cbeaks1 on Apr 21, 2021 13:02:36 GMT
I’m 44 and had mine about 4 weeks ago. Depends on the area I think.
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Apr 21, 2021 17:50:59 GMT
Had my first jab yesterday afternoon and initially thought I had got off lightly. Aside from a sore arm, I had no ill effects by the time I went to bed at midnight. No such luck today. My arm is really quite painful - I struggle to lift it above my shoulder - and I had to log off work after an hour with the usual symptoms. Shivers, aches, head fog etc. It's so common with the AstraZeneca jab that our HR department have created a new category for it when reporting absence. I had my first jab on Friday (Moderna) and my shoulder muscle pretty much sized up, it was really painful as well but thankfully it had eased up by Sunday morning. I didn’t have any other symptoms.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Apr 21, 2021 18:57:27 GMT
I’m 44 and had mine about 4 weeks ago. Depends on the area I think. Usually the upper arm.......
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 23, 2021 18:26:31 GMT
Friend of the wife works at a local surgery where they're doing Pfizer jabs and had some leftover. She was determined not to bin any on her watch so I've just volunteered.
|
|
|
Post by rodge on Apr 24, 2021 6:04:55 GMT
I signed up to get mine next week. Getting Pfizer instead of Moderna. The J&J is not an option but I wasn’t going to choose it anyway.
I’ve been in covid hot spots and around thousands of people in the last year and don’t think I’ve had it- certainly had no symptoms. I’m only getting it to help with travel later in the year as we’ll be going back to Ireland and they seem to have shut down everything there at the moment.
|
|