Calorie Counter

Message Boards General Health, Fitness and Diet
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Coronavirus prep

1335336338340341383

Replies

  • janejellyrolljanejellyroll Member Posts: 23,819 Member Member Posts: 23,819 Member
    hipari wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    My large multinational corporation just said we are delaying our planned start of return to the office from 9/1 to no earlier than 10/1.

    My large corporation told us not to expect anything earlier than January.

    When I read things like this, I wonder how we can even think about sending 'our' children back to schools in good conscience. Am I the only one who feels that's incredibly hypocritical??

    Yes. Pro athletes making millions get every possible safeguard, down to living in a Disney bubble, but school children, teachers, school staff, bus drivers, and all their families are just supposed to participate in a massive experiment while new cases and death rates are on the rise.

    I saw a story today that in Arizona, foster children will have to attend school in person, even while their foster parents are allowed a choice of in-person, virtual, or hybrid for other children in the household (bio/adopted/legal guardianship). There currently are no exceptions, although they are apparently going to consider the possibility of allowing foster children with underlying conditions that put them at added risk of not attending in person. Excuse my language, but what the *baby sloth*?

    The only possible benevolent spin I can put on this is that they're worried that foster children who are being abused won't have a way to alert any adults or possibly get help if they're not physically going to school. I HOPE at least there were good intentions behind this plan - trying to give the benefit of the doubt here.

    Here elementary and middle schools opened for the last two weeks in May precisely because otherwise children in bad situation wouldn’t have been met by outside adults at school in 6 months. It was about all kids and not just foster kids though, and teachers around the country reported that the families they were most concerned about kept their children home those 2 weeks.

    Still, it breaks my heart that the amount of notifications/reports to child protective services dropped like a ball mid-March when schools and daycare centers closed. I don’t believe in the needs stopping for a hot second, it was just that nobody found out and made reports. Here teachers and daycare workers have a legal obligation to notify child protection if they suspect anything.

    I really feel for the kids who aren't safe at home, they're in a terrible situation right now (I mean I feel for them all the time, but it seems even worse now with current circumstances).
  • TonyB0588TonyB0588 Member Posts: 9,033 Member Member Posts: 9,033 Member
    mockchoc wrote: »
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    I was heartened when I ran to the store this a.m., needing a few things we're out of. A sign on their door read something to the affect that if you're not wearing a mask, you cannot enter the store. THAT made me happy. But then I go in and there are still 5 out of maybe 25 people NOT wearing a mask. WTH? Back up your signage and make them go home to get their mask or have disposables on hand to offer them! Otherwise, you lose all sense of credibility. :( And why bother posting a sign at all??
    My sister and I went to a book store yesterday that posted a sign on their door, 'Please wear a mask covering nose and mouth at all times'. My sister had a mask and we'd just entered but she forgot to pull it up. The worker came right over and politely asked her to cover her nose; my sister apologized and the lady was very polite.
    What a difference in how store policies are being handled.

    Others have mentioned the shooting/stabbing (which happened around here).

    I suspect that in addition to differences in store policy or employee assertiveness, there may be differences in the nature of the average shopper in particular kinds of stores, that comes into play. Obviously, any kind of person may go anywhere, but there's a reason bars frequently have bouncers, and bookstores rarely do. ;)

    Grocery stores get everyone in them, though different chains may appeal to different sub-markets. Bookstores, though there's variation of course, may on average have a narrower range of probable habitues.

    What differences?? If it's the policy, just enforce it. I know I CANNOT go inside anywhere without one, so I keep one in my pocket. On approaching the door, out comes my mask, and then i can enter. No fuss, no argument.

    Not everyone is Ok to do what they are asked as you are and I am the same. I'd do it no problem. How can every place there enforce this? I'm not from USA and don't have what is happening there Covid wise as much but is there even enough guards they can hire to do this? How do you think this can be done?

    I'm not from the USA either, but here they already hire guards at every supermarket, bank, post office, government agency, shopping mall, etc. It just needs one of those guards at or near the door to be on policy enforcement rather than crime watch. It has simply become part of their job. But I don't see anyone aggressively approaching the door with any intention of defying the guard. Its usually a polite conversation, gentle reminder if necessary, then please proceed.

    Some locations are doing temperature checks as well, and a family of four were recently asked to remain on the outside pending a recheck because the mother and youngest son had temperatures above the allowed limit. I don't know what happened 10 minutes later when it was taken again. But it wasn't a fight, just a pleasant conversation.
  • janejellyrolljanejellyroll Member Posts: 23,819 Member Member Posts: 23,819 Member
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    mockchoc wrote: »
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    I was heartened when I ran to the store this a.m., needing a few things we're out of. A sign on their door read something to the affect that if you're not wearing a mask, you cannot enter the store. THAT made me happy. But then I go in and there are still 5 out of maybe 25 people NOT wearing a mask. WTH? Back up your signage and make them go home to get their mask or have disposables on hand to offer them! Otherwise, you lose all sense of credibility. :( And why bother posting a sign at all??
    My sister and I went to a book store yesterday that posted a sign on their door, 'Please wear a mask covering nose and mouth at all times'. My sister had a mask and we'd just entered but she forgot to pull it up. The worker came right over and politely asked her to cover her nose; my sister apologized and the lady was very polite.
    What a difference in how store policies are being handled.

    Others have mentioned the shooting/stabbing (which happened around here).

    I suspect that in addition to differences in store policy or employee assertiveness, there may be differences in the nature of the average shopper in particular kinds of stores, that comes into play. Obviously, any kind of person may go anywhere, but there's a reason bars frequently have bouncers, and bookstores rarely do. ;)

    Grocery stores get everyone in them, though different chains may appeal to different sub-markets. Bookstores, though there's variation of course, may on average have a narrower range of probable habitues.

    What differences?? If it's the policy, just enforce it. I know I CANNOT go inside anywhere without one, so I keep one in my pocket. On approaching the door, out comes my mask, and then i can enter. No fuss, no argument.

    Not everyone is Ok to do what they are asked as you are and I am the same. I'd do it no problem. How can every place there enforce this? I'm not from USA and don't have what is happening there Covid wise as much but is there even enough guards they can hire to do this? How do you think this can be done?

    I'm not from the USA either, but here they already hire guards at every supermarket, bank, post office, government agency, shopping mall, etc. It just needs one of those guards at or near the door to be on policy enforcement rather than crime watch. It has simply become part of their job. But I don't see anyone aggressively approaching the door with any intention of defying the guard. Its usually a polite conversation, gentle reminder if necessary, then please proceed.

    Some locations are doing temperature checks as well, and a family of four were recently asked to remain on the outside pending a recheck because the mother and youngest son had temperatures above the allowed limit. I don't know what happened 10 minutes later when it was taken again. But it wasn't a fight, just a pleasant conversation.

    But lots of smaller retailers don't have guards and even with larger stores the on-site security is more focused on loss prevention than enforcing regulations.
  • GaleHawkinsGaleHawkins Member Posts: 7,938 Member Member Posts: 7,938 Member
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    ReenieHJ wrote: »
    I was heartened when I ran to the store this a.m., needing a few things we're out of. A sign on their door read something to the affect that if you're not wearing a mask, you cannot enter the store. THAT made me happy. But then I go in and there are still 5 out of maybe 25 people NOT wearing a mask. WTH? Back up your signage and make them go home to get their mask or have disposables on hand to offer them! Otherwise, you lose all sense of credibility. :( And why bother posting a sign at all??
    My sister and I went to a book store yesterday that posted a sign on their door, 'Please wear a mask covering nose and mouth at all times'. My sister had a mask and we'd just entered but she forgot to pull it up. The worker came right over and politely asked her to cover her nose; my sister apologized and the lady was very polite.
    What a difference in how store policies are being handled.

    I don't know where you are located, but given that in the U.S. retail employees that have tried to enforce masking policies have been screamed at by in-your-face spittle-spewing maskless individuals, physically assaulted, and even shot and killed, I don't think it's fair to ask people who are already at greater-than-average exposure from their jobs -- probably for lower-than-average wages -- to take on the added risk of masking enforcement.

    I don't know what the right answer is to enforcing masking requirements, but it doesn't seem fair to ask the retail workers to take on that burden.

    While I agree with you, simply putting up a sign isn't going to change a thing. :( You either enforce it or take it down because otherwise, more and more people are not going to listen to anyone's rules. :( Well, except the ones who care anyways. There has got to be a way to stand behind a store's policies.

    I'm in Vermont and I know people can take a very defensive stance to being told what to do if they don't want to do it(much like a toddler). It's happening most everywhere. I don't blame retailers who are in a very vulnerable position to not engage in a possible volatile situation. But any time you make a rule and not enforce it, you lose all credibility. :(
    Places like McDonalds, etc., who are claiming you have to wear a mask....how do they deal with an irate customer?

    Mask signage is more legally driven than it is health related. The last I knew in the USA McDonald's was Drive Thur only but that may vary from region to region. Only staff who are willing to be harmed or killed demand mask usage by customers in the USA. Weddings, reunions, social events like clubs and churches seem to be real COVID-19 spread factors locally. Well per the news protesters that are for and against many issues tend to be spreaders as well.
    edited July 31
  • TonyB0588TonyB0588 Member Posts: 9,033 Member Member Posts: 9,033 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Unfortunately will happen:

    pbc959mued51.png

    Interesting scenario!!
  • missysippy930missysippy930 Member Posts: 2,142 Member Member Posts: 2,142 Member
    There’s a lot of things that don’t make sense right now. Professional sports and resuming school are going to be interesting. Early days for both. It will be interesting to see what transpires in the next few weeks. Like my father used to say, “can’t never tried”. Who will pay the price? A news blurb just came across saying 99% of US deaths could have been prevented if it would have been handled correctly from the beginning.
  • Theoldguy1Theoldguy1 Member Posts: 1,229 Member Member Posts: 1,229 Member
    My employer with several sites across the U.S. (and other countries) announced a new policy today, effective immediately. The policy is that anyone who travels for personal reasons to a "red zone" state* is not allowed to come to the facility for 14 days after returning, and that it will be unpaid. There isn't anything clear about those of us who are able to work from home if we can work and get paid without having to come into the facility. It does state that if we live in a "red zone" state, then our home is not included in the policy (we can come to work anyway).

    *Red zone state in the policy is defined as a state with a 7 day positive test rate of 10% or greater, which will be updated weekly.

    More recently, testing has become scarce again in some places and that means the positive test rate increases (only people who are really sick are getting tested).

    I'm thinking this policy may make some managers re-consider letting those of us who can WFH do so.

    Interesting but how does the company tell if someone has been to a 'red" state?
  • T1DCarnivoreRunnerT1DCarnivoreRunner Member Posts: 10,903 Member Member Posts: 10,903 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    My employer with several sites across the U.S. (and other countries) announced a new policy today, effective immediately. The policy is that anyone who travels for personal reasons to a "red zone" state* is not allowed to come to the facility for 14 days after returning, and that it will be unpaid. There isn't anything clear about those of us who are able to work from home if we can work and get paid without having to come into the facility. It does state that if we live in a "red zone" state, then our home is not included in the policy (we can come to work anyway).

    *Red zone state in the policy is defined as a state with a 7 day positive test rate of 10% or greater, which will be updated weekly.

    More recently, testing has become scarce again in some places and that means the positive test rate increases (only people who are really sick are getting tested).

    I'm thinking this policy may make some managers re-consider letting those of us who can WFH do so.

    Interesting but how does the company tell if someone has been to a 'red" state?

    Some of us were discussing that. We have to keep it very quiet, I suppose... honor system only goes so far. But of course, many of us talk about our vacations at least some. I know the dept. manager (I work in the dept, but am unusual as I report directly to someone at corp. and not to her) has vacation scheduled next month in a red state and everyone knows where she goes on her annual vacation every year.

    The trouble is that it doesn't say in the policy whether we can WFH and get paid. Many of us did that for more than 2 months earlier, so we have proven we can do it. Our corp. office is still WFH and was already planned to be that way through Sept. I'm looking into that as an option in case my race on Sept. 6 still ends up happening.
  • mockchocmockchoc Member Posts: 6,407 Member Member Posts: 6,407 Member
    Disagree all you like but doesn't change my thoughts. Tell me why you disagree. I'd love to hear it.
    edited August 1
Sign In or Register to comment.