Coronavirus

[Sith Happens]

20 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Not sure what draconian rules are preventing this from happening? As I mentioned on another post, companies are continuing with it as productivity is good, office space costs are large and there is a risk of outbreaks in offices. Employees would clearly by worried about piling onto public transport, especially when people won't wear masks.

I wonder how many businesses just think that while productivity is good why bother with having to implement covid 19 safe environments in the work place? There will no doubt be a cost for this and also the risk of disruption if someone does test positive and isolation is required.

Yes im sure that people can return to home working if isolation is required but its still a disruption.

Where i work we have been told no return until next year, which surprises me really, we have big office environments that yes may not be covid secure if everyone returned, but if say half returned i am sure they could easily be.

I suppose you could then say well who decides which 50% return and they could argue its not fair as they have their commuting costs back but others benefit from no commute, costs and time savings.

[Gone]

23 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

I suppose you could then say well who decides which 50% return and they could argue its not fair as they have their commuting costs back but others benefit from no commute, costs and time savings.

I don’t buy the savings on commute and time as an argument. Undoubtedly they are there, but you decide where you live in relation to work it’s generally not the other way around. The commute to work is your decision not your employer, so if and when we get back to normal you’ve enjoyed the time and money saved then move closer to your place or employment. 

[ariotofmyown]

26 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

I wonder how many businesses just think that while productivity is good why bother with having to implement covid 19 safe environments in the work place? There will no doubt be a cost for this and also the risk of disruption if someone does test positive and isolation is required.

Yes im sure that people can return to home working if isolation is required but its still a disruption.

Where i work we have been told no return until next year, which surprises me really, we have big office environments that yes may not be covid secure if everyone returned, but if say half returned i am sure they could easily be.

I suppose you could then say well who decides which 50% return and they could argue its not fair as they have their commuting costs back but others benefit from no commute, costs and time savings.

At my place, things have gone very well with everyone working at home. The worry is things won't work as well when half of the people in the office and half at home. People always at home are going to have a very different experience to everyone in office.

I think long term we'll move to a situation when certain teams all come in together for 1 or 2 days per week. And perhaps everyone who wants to works at home during school holidays.  Could end up at least halving the amount of office space needed.

[Gritstone Ram]

Just seen that the current test may also detect dead coronavirus from old infections. 
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54000629

[ariotofmyown]

8 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

I don’t buy the savings on commute and time as an argument. Undoubtedly they are there, but you decide where you live in relation to work it’s generally not the other way around. The commute to work is your decision not your employer, so if and when we get back to normal you’ve enjoyed the time and money saved then move closer to your place or employment. 

Saving 2 hours a day on commuting is great for work life balance and can improve mental health. The money saved on commuting can be spent in other ways too. Less cars on the road is better for the environment and cuts congestion.

 

[Sith Happens]

15 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

I don’t buy the savings on commute and time as an argument. Undoubtedly they are there, but you decide where you live in relation to work it’s generally not the other way around. The commute to work is your decision not your employer, so if and when we get back to normal you’ve enjoyed the time and money saved then move closer to your place or employment. 

I do agree with you, just guesswork on the reasons why employees may feel hard done by if they are selected to return and not others.

[Gone]

14 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Saving 2 hours a day on commuting is great for work life balance and can improve mental health. The money saved on commuting can be spent in other ways too. Less cars on the road is better for the environment and cuts congestion.

 

Agree with all that, absolutely. My point is as an employee we can’t use saving our cash and time as an argument for not going into the office. We are generally contacted to a work place with normally specific hours. Now saying well I’m saving money, can lie in a bit longer and take the kids to school is irrelevant in the context of the employee/employer contractual agreement.

I must admit however I am working much longer hours since working from home. Also the work/home balance is out of sync, I can’t sometimes distinguish when a work day ends and I can switch off. This weeks trip was a breath of fresh air. 

[djfred84]

1 hour ago, TexasRam said:

Agree with all that, absolutely. My point is as an employee we can’t use saving our cash and time as an argument for not going into the office. We are generally contacted to a work place with normally specific hours. Now saying well I’m saving money, can lie in a bit longer and take the kids to school is irrelevant in the context of the employee/employer contractual agreement.

I must admit however I am working much longer hours since working from home. Also the work/home balance is out of sync, I can’t sometimes distinguish when a work day ends and I can switch off. This weeks trip was a breath of fresh air. 

I thought business have seen similar amounts of productivity from employees and there for looking at smaller premises to rent which is why a lot of businesses are looking outside city centers. They could also be looking for government slash rental space sweeteners after all the businesses own all the cards.

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, TexasRam said:

Agree with all that, absolutely. My point is as an employee we can’t use saving our cash and time as an argument for not going into the office. We are generally contacted to a work place with normally specific hours. Now saying well I’m saving money, can lie in a bit longer and take the kids to school is irrelevant in the context of the employee/employer contractual agreement.

I must admit however I am working much longer hours since working from home. Also the work/home balance is out of sync, I can’t sometimes distinguish when a work day ends and I can switch off. This weeks trip was a breath of fresh air. 

True, but I think it's worth taking commute time into consideration when a company decides who is coming in or not. And if they are driving or using public transport. I'm going into office Friday and next Monday and looking forward to it.

[angieram]

For a lot of employers it makes sense for  at least some staff to work from home because if everyone returns and one member of staff tests positive all have to self isolate. Maybe not everyone can work from home (my employer for example doesn't have the technology for everyone to be remote working) so they have to protect the staff who are in the office. 

[B4ev6is]

Well even at our places we currently running on few members of staff and yes I have to wear a fazour and a mask of which I hate wearing a total nightmare.

[alexxxxx]

gigantic figure of cases today (3k approx). seems implausible from yesterdays figure unless theyve been holding some back.

im not convinced that the ons survey is right.

[Rev]

My wife works for a firm that is now almost exclusively WFH.

They'll start back in January, 5% at a time until they reach their Covid Safe capacity, just over 600.

They currently employee 1700 at the site.

WFH will become the new normal in such circumstances.

 

[djfred84]

I think there will be a subtle move away from city centres and more business and the like setting up on the outskirts due to wfh.

[Gone]

Not sure how flat the curve needs to be before we can return all back to normal, but it can’t get much flatter

[Wolfie]

My first day today of being office based again, after only calling in maybe 1 day a week in the last couple of months.

Good to be back but only about half the people are going to be office based for the foreseeable future.

Mrs Wolfie has been told she'll be home based until at least January, as the local authority (Lincolnshire) have mothballed the building she & her team were based in. Not a problem for her as she'd turned a spare bedroom into her office but I feel for those in her team that are working on a laptop in the corner of their bedroom or on the dining table.

[sage]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-54053618

This may not bode well for football returning.

[sage]

1 hour ago, TexasRam said:

Not sure how flat the curve needs to be before we can return all back to normal, but it can’t get much flatter

So you've picked one aspect of the coronavirus in one part of the country. 

 

[Gone]

14 minutes ago, sage said:

So you've picked one aspect of the coronavirus in one part of the country. 

 

I would of thought COVID cases in hospital would of been the key indicator, don’t you? 

[sage]

1 minute ago, TexasRam said:

I would of thought COVID cases in hospital would of been the key indicator, don’t you? 

One of many.

Ignoring the massive increase in cases yesterday.