Coronavirus precautions: Has the world gone mad?

[AdamWW]

This was outside, and they were literally stood behind the chairs!

Even outside I imagine they still want to control capacity.

And you can see how it happens - someone is told they need to make sure that the area is only used by people sitting at the tables, and it gets taken a bit literally.

Where's Esther Ranzen and her jobsworth award when you need it?

 

[kieron]

I hope she reserved it for people with a bit more authority than that poor woman!

 

[johnnychips]

Even outside I imagine they still want to control capacity.

And you can see how it happens - someone is told they need to make sure that the area is only used by people sitting at the tables, and it gets taken a bit literally.

Where's Esther Ranzen and her jobsworth award when you need it?

The trouble is, you can’t have a deep intellectual argument with someone who is only doing their job; it isn’t fair on them. I’ve had the same problem with EMR (See ‘Disputes‘ thread). And I’m sure we’ve all had to implement policies at work that we think are idiotic, but it’s easier to go for the quiet life rather than be seen as a ‘troublemaker’.

This is serious now, though. We need to get back to normal. So instead of just thinking ‘sod it’ I will be contacting the pub’s manager pointing out the silliness of the policy and how it could put people off; and I’ve made complaints to EMR and Travelmaster today about their attitude to customers.

 

[furlong]

First Group chief exec widely reported today saying

Face coverings are now mandatory on public transport and I think with that we can change the message to the fact that public transportation is safe.

Now he just needs to understand the inherent contradiction in that sentence - if it was safe they wouldn't ask you to wear face coverings as if you were in a hospital! - and extend his campaign also to scrap that requirement, and then his non-essential passengers can feel that it's OK to return.

 

[Bantamzen]

This could have been in the pub bit, but I thought I’d put it here.

’The Mallard’ in Doncaster has an outside terrace, which is often used by smokers. It was a nice day yesterday, so I sat on it, not to smoke, but to look at the trains on Platform 1.

There was a table of four around which three people were standing smoking, and one sat down. The barmaid came out and said ‘you have to sit down!’ The customers, who I think were Romanian, ignored her, looking a bit bemused. When she came out again (can older readers remember Barbara Woodhouse?) she said ‘Sit! You have to sit! Or you will have to leave!’ They finished their fags anyway and went inside.

Five minutes later, a lad whom I’d taught years ago came out for a fag, and we were so pleased to see each other we instinctively shook hands - shock horror - and he stood talking to me on the far side of my
table. When she came out again, she told him to sit down.

Now I’m sure she was only obeying orders, but I haven’t seen any evidence, scientific, or indeed anecdotal, that a standing person transmits CV more than a sitting one

I'm going to be adopting a simple policy for places that enforce silly rules like this. Tell them politely as I walk out why I won't be returning, and put that into writing to them. Then take my custom elsewhere. Maybe if enough people follow suit the message might get through, and if not their soon to be empty premises might.

 

[kylemore]

First Group chief exec widely reported today saying


Now he just needs to understand the inherent contradiction in that sentence - if it was safe they wouldn't ask you to wear face coverings as if you were in a hospital! - and extend his campaign also to scrap that requirement, and then his non-essential passengers can feel that it's OK to return.

He and all the rail firms should be saving their breath and concentrating it at government with unrelenting pressure to withdraw the muzzle and social distancing stupidity.

 

[Enthusiast]

Now I’m sure she was only obeying orders, but I haven’t seen any evidence, scientific, or indeed anecdotal, that a standing person transmits CV more than a sitting one

On London buses now you are not permitted to stand. You don't have to anyway because their capacity is limited to about a third of the seat numbers but I have a dodgy knee and it often suits me on a short journey to stand in the wheelchair space rather than have to sit down and get up. Can't be done now. The driver will not move until he sees that everybody is seated.

Maybe if enough people follow suit the message might get through

But they won't.

 

[HSTEd]

Well Boris is now going to force face coverings too.

Wonderful.

 

[AdamWW]

On London buses now you are not permitted to stand. You don't have to anyway because their capacity is limited to about a third of the seat numbers but I have a dodgy knee and it often suits me on a short journey to stand in the wheelchair space rather than have to sit down and get up. Can't be done now. The driver will not move until he sees that everybody is seated.

Sounds not unlike the comment above about sitting down in a pub outdoor area

 

[Yew]

Well Boris is now going to force face coverings too.

Wonderful.

So much for following the science...

 

[AdamWW]

First Group chief exec widely reported today saying


Now he just needs to understand the inherent contradiction in that sentence - if it was safe they wouldn't ask you to wear face coverings as if you were in a hospital! - and extend his campaign also to scrap that requirement, and then his non-essential passengers can feel that it's OK to return.

Looking at the number of infections being reported, it looks as if public transport - or going anywhere that has other people in close proximity - is fairly safe now by most definitions of the word.

That in itself doesn't mean that social distancing/face masks aren't necessary because they may be needed in order to prevent infection levels rising again to the point where going out isn't safe.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Well Boris is now going to force face coverings too.

Wonderful.

Where has this been confirmed?

 

[MikeWM]

Where has this been confirmed?

It isn't - yet - but he seems to be moving in that direction due to his replies in the 'peoples PMQs' session he just did.

 

[AdamWW]

It isn't - yet - but he seems to be moving in that direction due to his replies in the 'peoples PMQs' session he just did.

He also seemed to be saying that everybody should now go into work if they can and only work from home if they have to. A slight change from the previous message.

Not sure what the impact of that on public transport is. Probably not much because I imagine most companies won't be basing their policies on announcements like that.

 

[westv]

It isn't - yet - but he seems to be moving in that direction due to his replies in the 'peoples PMQs' session he just did.

It's a certainty now I think.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well Boris is now going to force face coverings too.

Wonderful.

Well if he really wants to tank the English economy, this would be the way to do it? The big question is, and I put this to all the maskivists here, why now? We've shopped for months through the virus without them, and infection rates are, survey says, down!

 

[westv]

He also seemed to be saying that everybody should now go into work if they can and only work from home if they have to. A slight change from the previous message.

Not sure what the impact of that on public transport is. Probably not much because I imagine most companies won't be basing their policies on announcements like that.

He said he wanted people "to go back to work". Those working from home haven't stopped working so does he just mean those that aren't working at all??

Edit: I've reread what Boris said and I don't read it as saying people should only work from home now if they can't go in.

 

[PHILIPE]

Boris just says the first thing that comes into his head without thinking anything through.

 

[adc82140]

Thanks to his policies, many people don't have a work to go back to.

 

[MikeWM]

He also seemed to be saying that everybody should now go into work if they can and only work from home if they have to. A slight change from the previous message.

Not sure what the impact of that on public transport is. Probably not much because I imagine most companies won't be basing their policies on announcements like that.

I think our company was waiting for exactly that before reopening our offices. (Well, presumably a change in the official advice, rather than the PM randomly saying stuff on Facebook, but the one probably follows the other).

 

[Bantamzen]

He also seemed to be saying that everybody should now go into work if they can and only work from home if they have to. A slight change from the previous message.

Not sure what the impact of that on public transport is. Probably not much because I imagine most companies won't be basing their policies on announcements like that.

I can tell you not that is not the message given to public sector workers who are currently working from home. Quite the opposite in fact, in my department we've been told to expect this for anything up to 12 months, maybe even longer.

Edit:

Meanwhile....

UK will not join EU Covid-19 vaccine scheme
Sir Tim Barrow, the UK's Ambassador to the European Union, has confirmed that the UK has decided not to join the EU scheme for Covid-19 vaccine procurement.
In a letter to the Secretary-General of the European Commission, he said the UK would not participate because it "would be required to stop its negotiations with manufacturers with which the EU launched negotiations" and because the Commission said "it is not possible for the UK to have a role in the governance shaping decisions on which manufacturers to negotiate with, or the price, volume and delivery schedule negotiated".
Sir Tim went on to write that there could still be collaboration between the UK and the EU on areas such as "sharing of information on promising vaccine candidates" and "vaccine trials" and "manufacturing investments and capacity building".

Taken from the BBC live feed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-53358850

Oh boy, 2020 is turning out to be longer and stupider than Brexit, erm I mean we could have imagined. I'm off to the pub in an hour, thank goodness!!

 

[MikeWM]

It's a certainty now I think.

Probably. Given we seem determined to do the exact opposite of what makes sense, then it seems likely.

I wonder if this is a political risk though. A good part of his natural constituency probably won't embrace this (unlike, say, that of Sturgeon).

 

[AdamWW]

I think our company was waiting for exactly that before reopening our offices. (Well, presumably a change in the official advice, rather than the PM randomly saying stuff on Facebook, but the one probably follows the other).

Interesting.

I presume that as usual we'll need to wait for this to be 'interpreted', just like what looked like "All non-essential work to stop now" turned out to mean "All non-essential travelling in to work to stop now", and "Everybody back to work tomorrow" didn't quite mean that.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Probably. Given we seem determined to do the exact opposite of what makes sense, then it seems likely.

I wonder if this is a political risk though. A good part of his natural constituency probably won't embrace this (unlike, say, that of Sturgeon).

The group least likely to wear masks at present (according to the polling) are working class men who voted Conservative, backed Brexit, and live in the North of England or the Midlands. These are exactly the sort of people who voted enthusiastically for Johnson in 2019 - and I'd suggest they would be the most opposed to mandatory masks.

That said, considering there's no risk of a general election for a long time, will he care about the political implications? There aren't even local elections for another nine months, and that's assuming they don't get put back further.

 

[Scrotnig]

The group least likely to wear masks at present (according to the polling) are working class men who voted Conservative, backed Brexit, and live in the North of England or the Midlands. These are exactly the sort of people who voted enthusiastically for Johnson in 2019 - and I'd suggest they would be the most opposed to mandatory masks.

That said, considering there's no risk of a general election for a long time, will he care about the political implications? There aren't even local elections for another nine months, and that's assuming they don't get put back further.

I'm quite sure Johnson and the rest of the government know they have been fatally wounded by all of this.
There's just no way they're going to be able to stand for election off the back of it. I am pretty sure sometime this parliament Johnson will step down. Probably citing health following his run in with the virus, if I had to guess.

Everything he set out his stall as wanting to achieve at the election is now basically unachievable and the economy is tanked.

Short of them happening upon some miraculous, painless recovery, which is unlikely, I think they know it's over and they've got this term only.

 

[MikeWM]

The group least likely to wear masks at present (according to the polling) are working class men who voted Conservative, backed Brexit, and live in the North of England or the Midlands. These are exactly the sort of people who voted enthusiastically for Johnson in 2019 - and I'd suggest they would be the most opposed to mandatory masks.

Hmm, I'd not seen polling breakdowns, I was mainly guessing based on what I'd seen on the internet. Interesting.

That said, considering there's no risk of a general election for a long time, will he care about the political implications? There aren't even local elections for another nine months, and that's assuming they don't get put back further.

Who can say at this point. If you lose support, it is hard to get it back (see eg. Black Friday - the Conservatives had almost 5 years to recover from that, they failed). There seem to be a lot of very unhappy Conservatives out there. But in this case the lack of any suitable alternative place to put such a vote may be difficult. Absent the emergence of a Farage-like figure, people may just spoil their ballot, or not vote at all. That's certainly what I'd have to do if there was an election anytime soon.

 

[adc82140]

Looks like Guernsey are pulling the shutters down until a vaccine is found. I'd hate to be stuck on an island that small for a year, picturesque as it is.

 

[Huntergreed]

Looks like Guernsey are pulling the shutters down until a vaccine is found. I'd hate to be stuck on an island that small for a year, picturesque as it is.

A vaccine could at best be a year and at worst may never come, this is completely unrealistic

 

[adc82140]

They have an air bridge with the Isle of Man. They seem to think this will save the bacon of their tourist industry. However people who live on islands tend not to want to go on holiday to other islands.

 

[Domh245]

Meanwhile....

To be fair, we hold (in some respects) the leading candidate for a vaccine, and there's no leading candidates within the EU itself, so the only advantage of joining that scheme would be for trying to obtain the American or Chinese vaccines (or license to produce), which it sounds like we are already in discussions for. Would be an odd move if, like the report says, we'd have had no input over volumes or delivery schedule!