Coronavirus prep

@MikePfirrman Chief was a beautiful man.

hipari wrote: »

T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »

An area where I used to live has tripled their all-time cases now in the last 10 days. Even yet, some people still suggest nothing should close down again and schools should return as usual. I'm currently in a discussion with someone on social media (I don't know why I even try) with someone who tested positive recently and argues that gyms should stay open and they are safe because "healthy people kick covid." After I pointed out several cases of healthy marathon runners who became very ill or died due to Covid, the response was that distance runners are unhealthy. After she turned it into a sprinting vs. distance running debate, she explained that she sanitizes equipment as she is going to the gym so it isn't possible that she spread it to anyone while she was there (after testing positive, even though she really should just stay home, right?). Ugh... this is why the cases are increasing so fast.

Ummm, ugh. Reading this made me really happy to live in a country where appointed contagious disease doctors can order people to quarantine as an enforceable official ruling. I don’t know if anybody has tried to defy them, but from what I’ve understood you could be put under surveillance if you aren’t following the order at home.

On the upside for people put in official quarantine, there’s an extra form of social security you get paid during official quarantine if you can’t work from home. The amount matches what you would get paid as salary, so there’s no argument about income either.

State law already exists to require positivecases to stay home, but county sherriff has said he won't enforce it and county supervisors (governing county board) has said they won't do anything either. They say they want the county health dept. (underfunded and understaffed without any authority to regulate criminal law) to decide if they will do something and to actually do it. But with no authority...

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.

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

busyPK wrote: »

ReenieHJ wrote: »

janejellyroll 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??

Grown-ups working from home is relatively easy for a lot of positions (depends on the job duties and technology), but children home for virtual learning is totally different. They will need supervision, assistance with technology, etc.. If the government wants to help working parents by job protection / some wage protection then I'm all for virtual learning, but right now that is not the case.

While I agree with ReenieH's sentiment that there are lots of factors suggesting in person school is a bad idea in some areas, I do not necessarily think it's hypocritical for businesses to keep workers remote if they are able. There is a principle that people who can stay home doing so lowers the risk for those who cannot, making the community safer for everyone. This logic suggests that companies extending remote work makes it safer (maybe even makes it possible) to open school in person. While I'm constantly disheartened about how low a priority "common good" seems to be for individuals, companies & even policy makers in the US, there is a legitimate common good angle to keeping workers remote.

There is, of course, a self interested angle. The following are expensive: workers getting sick or dying, their dependents getting sick or dying, and even just the administrative shuffle of flip-flopping work protocols in different places at different times (and ensuing confusion). Schools opening and re-closing (which you know will happen in some places) is going to take a toll on worker productivity, too. Having a predictable plan for keeping workers working (even sub-optimally) is less costly than constant churn and chaos. This way if areas get slapped with successive shelter in place orders, companies are prepared with minimal impact. It's a decent business continuity plan.

I'm not sure why my company doesn't let some of us keep WFH. I've proven most of my job can be done from home. Employees in the factory wouldn't be able to WFH, but I could get all my on-site stuff done in 1/2 day per week and stay home the rest of the time... why not?!

Anyway, we have some production shut down due to absenteeism from employees who got infected. I feel like sending office employees like me home could maybe help a little bit to prevent spread and with no down-side for the company. We proved we could WFH for a almost 3 months already. Now that production is running, I have some on-site work, but not enough to come in every day.

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

busyPK wrote: »

ReenieHJ wrote: »

janejellyroll 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??

Grown-ups working from home is relatively easy for a lot of positions (depends on the job duties and technology), but children home for virtual learning is totally different. They will need supervision, assistance with technology, etc.. If the government wants to help working parents by job protection / some wage protection then I'm all for virtual learning, but right now that is not the case.

While I agree with ReenieH's sentiment that there are lots of factors suggesting in person school is a bad idea in some areas, I do not necessarily think it's hypocritical for businesses to keep workers remote if they are able. There is a principle that people who can stay home doing so lowers the risk for those who cannot, making the community safer for everyone. This logic suggests that companies extending remote work makes it safer (maybe even makes it possible) to open school in person. While I'm constantly disheartened about how low a priority "common good" seems to be for individuals, companies & even policy makers in the US, there is a legitimate common good angle to keeping workers remote.

There is, of course, a self interested angle. The following are expensive: workers getting sick or dying, their dependents getting sick or dying, and even just the administrative shuffle of flip-flopping work protocols in different places at different times (and ensuing confusion). Schools opening and re-closing (which you know will happen in some places) is going to take a toll on worker productivity, too. Having a predictable plan for keeping workers working (even sub-optimally) is less costly than constant churn and chaos. This way if areas get slapped with successive shelter in place orders, companies are prepared with minimal impact. It's a decent business continuity plan.

Yep. When I was working in a grocery store, the safety training was very clear about the rule that we were never allowed to go after shoplifters, we always had to call the police or security company instead. This was to avoid violence or accidents related to an uncontrolled/heated situation. The main reason stated for this was that one sick leave day costs about 400€ for the store chain, and it’s not physically possible for a shoplifter to carry that much value out of the store. This was in 2011/2012 so inflation has done it’s part to raise the cost, and most office jobs probably pay higher salaries than grocery stores -> higher costs from sick leaves.

In the company I work for, a single person can bring in about 1000€ revenue per day. There’s about 25 people in our company, and one person could easily infect half of those people if everyone was at the office and we were in a bad luck. So, with 12 people out sick, it would be 12k lost revenue per day, and covid can easily last for weeks. Not to mention the long-term consequences of bad will from customers due to missed deadlines or project staff changing unexpectedly, the non-infected staff getting probably overworked and exhausted due to trying to cover for everyone, leading to bad quality of work and/or burnouts, and the long-term financial consequences of not being able to invest in anything, including recruitment, or in worse cases having to cut costs and possibly even lay people off.

Yes, this spring was difficult for many of my colleagues, especially those who have small kids at home and had to juggle work that requires intensive focusing with taking care of kids, supervising their schooling, cooking lunch etc. Still, nobody in our company got infected, sick days were on average level, and everyone’s family is safe.

I’ve been on vacation for the past couple of weeks, but reading this just made me realize I have to decide and write our next installment of covid policy as the previous one is in effect until mid-August. Luckily it’s a small company and we’re able to move quickly, but I still wish I had a crystal ball that showed the future and if/when the second wave will hit our corner of the world. It’s a small company and I’m in no way a health&safety specialist, it just happens to fall within my overly wide job description. I still feel like I’m just making *kitten* up while trying to remain as clear and rational as possible while scrambling to keep everyone safe. Fun times making these kinds of decisions.

Diatonic12 wrote: »

One of my relatives has the 'Rona. Running 103 degree temps for over 10 days now. They traveled all over the country exposing all of the relatives as they tooled along before and after the 4th. Choosing to forgive is tough business. I flew over the cuckoo's nest before they arrived and went into hiding. There are no more words now.

From my point of view you did the right thing regardless of what happened, happens. I'm doing the same and I'm going to keep staying as far away from this little SarsCov2 germ that I can. I want to live.

Another thing to consider on the topic of "schools reopening or not" is students have feelings about this thing too. I have a 12 year old niece and she was telling me that she was so" glad and relieved" that our school board decided to do school online this nine weeks-(then reevaluate each nine weeks based on the data- bad numbers continue online etc). My niece was saying that she had been so "afraid" that she would have to go back to school now because she has really bad childhood asthma as well as a low immune system, also if she gets too hot or too excited she has nose bleeds etc.( and she was afraid because for three years in a row(despite getting the flu shot each year- she ALWAYS got the flu)- so she says she had been worried about CoVid 19- because she wanted " to live"-- I mean what do you say? except to try to encourage her and pray for the best-- I have heard that other children are afraid, uncertain, fearing actually going into the school building while they numbers are up in their state---- so kids may not be saying it but "some" of them are feeling these emotions as well we adults(sigh)

autumnblade75 wrote: »

jenilla1 wrote: »

autumnblade75 wrote: »

I am not prepared, now, for the new work guidelines.

As of today, we are required to do a Prework Health Check. Well, I woke up with a headache, so the system told me to stay home and I can't come back until I'm cleared by my health care provider. So I called Teladoc. Who are not authorized (nobody is) to clear me for Covid. Over a headache. No fever, no cough, no nothing, but a headache.

Of course, calling the Teladoc managed to trigger an anxiety attack. So that was lovely.

I'm not sure how to resolve this.

I'm locked out of performing the next Prework Health Check until I contact a manager. I have no idea who is actually a manager, vs a supervisor, and I definitely don't have any contact information. I texted my supervisor, but like he already told me, all he got was the same flyer they handed me at the door.

I guess I just walk in with the Teladoc diagnosis of "headache" printed out as proof that I sought care, and hope for the best. Super system we got here, keeping everyone safe. I half hope they fire me. Maybe I should try harder.

This kind of system encourages people to lie. It's like at my husband's work. The first day they implemented screening like this, he was asked, "have you come in contact with a covid positive person?" He answered, "I don't know. I don't think so. How would I know that?" The employee screening him sent him home and told him he was supposed to say "no" definitively. Sent the next guy home because of his allergies. Asked if he had a cough. The guy said he just had the usual allergy cough he had every morning of his life. Nothing new or any other symptoms. He got sent home. Half the staff was sent home that first day. Managers had to call everybody back in and "coach" them how to respond to the screening questions. Everybody basically learned to lie after that. The coworker with the frequent migraines straight up lies to the screener's face multiple times per week. If this becomes a habit, actual sick people might start lying. Maybe they need more than just strict yes/no questions as your ticket into work.

Right now, I'm waiting out the clock. I have followed the next steps, as outlined by the app. My manager is now required to reset the app so I can pre-screen for work. I am allowed/required to do this "no later than one hour before scheduled start time" which is 2:40am today. The app is not yet reset, and I don't expect them to reset it. I have already started looking for a new job. This is a stupid game that brings me no joy, and I don't know why I'm playing it.

The problem with allowing individual employees to decide whether their symptoms should “count” towards passing or failing the checklist is that a lot of supposedly asymptomatic transmission turns out, in retrospect, to be presymptomatic - “I just had a runny nose and thought it was my usual allergies but then I got a fever on the third day” - or what they call paucisymptomatic, which means there were symptoms but they never got serious enough for the individual to realize they were sick until afterwards, when they realize they “felt a little off for a couple of weeks.”

Not to mention people like my mom who will bust out with a rattling chest cough in the middle of December and claim it’s hay fever. Dude. There is nothing blooming now. That’s bronchitis! People are amazing in their ability to insist they couldn’t possibly be contagious, in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Like the person mentioned above who is still going to the gym with a positive test.