Coronavirus

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Well that's kind of where I was going with it - it would be a sticky wicket if someone were to be against the idea of something like the Rooney Rule (which only applies to interviewing - not to hiring) as being overly prescriptive on employers - but then also complained that the idea of employers being free to choose who they wanted to actually employ based on the legal criteria of their choosing being "absolutely horrific"

But your right - the choice is with the individuals then as to whether they continue to use that employer's services

Someone gave the example of Saga - the holiday company for old people - insisting on vaccinated employees. That's a tough choice for the pensioner eh? Do I go on holiday with Saga, knowing all their reps are vaccinated - or do I choose a holiday with a company where rep may give me covid?

Seems pretty pointless to me. If you're going on holiday I would imagine your not very risk averse anyway.

[maxjam]

15 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Someone gave the example of Saga - the holiday company for old people - insisting on vaccinated employees. That's a tough choice for the pensioner eh? Do I go on holiday with Saga, knowing all their reps are vaccinated - or do I choose a holiday with a company where rep may give me covid?

This is the bit thats confusing me...

If you have been vaccinated why does it matter if your holiday rep hasn't?  I posted the AstroZenica study previously (17k+ people tested) stating the vaccine 100% prevents hospitalization and death. 

I'm not sure why the fear of others not being vaccinated is being projected onto those that have.

[Stive Pesley]

12 minutes ago, maxjam said:

This is the bit thats confusing me...

If you have been vaccinated why does it matter if your holiday rep hasn't?  I posted the AstroZenica study previously (17k+ people tested) stating the vaccine 100% prevents hospitalization and death. 

I'm not sure why the fear of others not being vaccinated is being projected onto those that have.

I like how both replies have ignored my actual point, and focussed on the tongue in cheek example I gave ?

I thought the 100% prevention of hospitalisation/death was only a small sample, and there were no true figures yet? Even so - I'm sure it's going to be pretty high, but still you're both assuming that all the customers have been vaccinated - some may not have been, and you're also assuming that preventing hospitalisation/death is the only outcome. Someone could still get pretty sick and have a ruined holiday

Plus - they have to share hotels, flights etc with other non-Saga customers who may not have been vaccinated.

The point is about companies having to protect themselves and their reputation. Saga just don't want bad publicity about customers catching covid from their reps - or law suits from other companies because the Saga rep gave their whole part covid

But still it's only an example, and pull it apart if you must - but all I'm saying is that companies should be allowed to make whatever legal decisions they like to protect their operations

 

 

[maxjam]

4 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I like how both replies have ignored my actual point, and focussed on the tongue in cheek example I gave ?

What was the actual point?  I've spent the last few posts talking about the AstroZenica study (17k ppl is not a small study imo, but no doubt someone will tell me otherwise...)

 

6 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I thought the 100% prevention of hospitalisation/death was only a small sample, and there were no true figures yet? Even so - I'm sure it's going to be pretty high, but still you're both assuming that all the customers have been vaccinated - some may not have been, and you're also assuming that preventing hospitalisation/death is the only outcome. Someone could still get pretty sick and have a ruined holiday

Flu, measles, food poisoning, fall over - can't live your life in a bubble.

 

7 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Plus - they have to share hotels, flights etc with other non-Saga customers who may not have been vaccinated.

Again, you protect yourself.  If others haven't had their jab and still gone on holiday, surely thats their decision?

 

9 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

The point is about companies having to protect themselves and their reputation. Saga just don't want bad publicity about customers catching covid from their reps - or law suits from other companies because the Saga rep gave their whole part covid

Again, just shift the responsibility to the customer in the small print - everytime I go to the pub on the way back from watching Derby the sign in the pub carpark tells me vehicles left there are done so at the owners risk.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

Just caught something on the radio about sending excess vaccines to developing countries and urging others to do the same? If so, fair play.

[Stive Pesley]

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

What was the actual point?

That someone can't call it "absolutely horrific" that independent companies might choose to only employ people based on a legal selection criteria, if they're also going to complain when independent companies are regulated to adhere to things like the "Rooney Rule"

You either want companies to be free from overly-oppressive state regulation or you don't

 

[FindernRam]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

sending excess vaccines to developing countries and urging others to do the same

I'm sure France and Germany will be grateful.

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

That someone can't call it "absolutely horrific" that independent companies might choose to only employ people based on a legal selection criteria, if they're also going to complain when independent companies are regulated to adhere to things like the "Rooney Rule"

You either want companies to be free from overly-oppressive state regulation or you don't

 

Let’s be honest , the gov want to make it mandatory but don’t want to be seen to be doing it and will allow companies to do the dirty work ,

personally I would rather they get on and do it or not allow companies to do it ,,,so we all know where we are

the road we are going down will turn into a real clusterduck with legal minefield s and nobody taking responsibility ?‍♂️,

the one thing we’ve learnt through this last year is the population will do what they are told

[Eddie]

15 hours ago, TexasRam said:

We may have more in common than you think ?

See you in the beer thread. When this crap is over, I would be happy to buy you a beer.

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, maxjam said:

This is the bit thats confusing me...

If you have been vaccinated why does it matter if your holiday rep hasn't?  I posted the AstroZenica study previously (17k+ people tested) stating the vaccine 100% prevents hospitalization and death. 

I'm not sure why the fear of others not being vaccinated is being projected onto those that have.

I've just had a letter from the NHS (arrived today) saying that I must continue shielding until at least March 31st.

[Stive Pesley]

29 minutes ago, Archied said:

Let’s be honest , the gov want to make it mandatory but don’t want to be seen to be doing it and will allow companies to do the dirty work

Do they? I'm no fan of the current administration, but I dont get that impression at all. I think you're right that they are just abdicating the decision. They seem incapable of any sort of direction. Just a never ending series of changing their minds on everything

32 minutes ago, Archied said:

personally I would rather they get on and do it or not allow companies to do it ,,,so we all know where we are

That's a weird statement - you want them to either force it on companies to do it, or force companies NOT to do it? Both of those sound like fascististic authoritarian moves to me. But yes, you would know where you stood in the same way that the the Russians knew where they stood under Stalin!

35 minutes ago, Archied said:

the one thing we’ve learnt through this last year is the population will do what they are told

Not sure if you missed a word out there or not? surely we've learned that half the population will do what they are told (comply with lockdowns, wear masks etc) and the other half won't do as they are told (lockdown sceptics, "i aint wearing no face nappy", just been to Barnard Castle for a day out and then to a mass rave in a warehouse types)

[Eddie]

3 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Just caught something on the radio

Christ, that's bad luck. You should have washed your hands after touching it.

[G STAR RAM]

9 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Not sure if you missed a word out there or not? surely we've learned that half the population will do what they are told (comply with lockdowns, wear masks etc) and the other half won't do as they are told (lockdown sceptics, "i aint wearing no face nappy", just been to Barnard Castle for a day out and then to a mass rave in a warehouse types)

Not sure what you are basing this on?

From my personal experience, I would say its probably about 95% of the people that I know sticking to the rules.

I don't know anyone that has blatantly broken the rules with absolutely no regard for them in fact.

You missed attending BLM marches off your list by the way.

[Archied]

16 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Do they? I'm no fan of the current administration, but I dont get that impression at all. I think you're right that they are just abdicating the decision. They seem incapable of any sort of direction. Just a never ending series of changing their minds on everything

That's a weird statement - you want them to either force it on companies to do it, or force companies NOT to do it? Both of those sound like fascististic authoritarian moves to me. But yes, you would know where you stood in the same way that the the Russians knew where they stood under Stalin!

Not sure if you missed a word out there or not? surely we've learned that half the population will do what they are told (comply with lockdowns, wear masks etc) and the other half won't do as they are told (lockdown sceptics, "i aint wearing no face nappy", just been to Barnard Castle for a day out and then to a mass rave in a warehouse types)

Nothing weird at all , I’m not pretending that what I think makes the slightest difference, what I am saying is just like in every area I can’t be doing with guff, much prefer straight talking and honestly rather than round the houses sneaking,

half the people have not conformed to rules ?

can assure you that being out working through all this observing and listening to people out and about and also friends the vast majority have and are following rules whether they agree or not,, not sure where you get half from ?‍♂️

[Stive Pesley]

41 minutes ago, Archied said:

Can assure you that being out working through all this observing and listening to people out and about and also friends the vast majority have and are following rules whether they agree or not,, not sure where you get half from ?‍♂️

Well I was using the word "half" figuratively to indicate a split - the precise details of that split, I don't pretend to know - nor could anyone

The problem is that the people in the latter group of "rebels" - and the reporting of their actions - have such a loud presence on social media, it can feel like a bigger problem than it is. Like you, I only see minimal amounts of mild rule-bending between my immediate friends/family but the news channels report every indiscretion with glee and the Icke-type ringleaders stoke up an army of keyboard warriors on social media who love to boast about how much they aren't following rules because they aren't "sheeple"

Now I can't even remember if you were trying to say people complying with rules was good or bad ?

 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

17 hours ago, i-Ram said:

Sorry, I don’t take much part in this thread anymore, but I note today that quite a high percentage of care staff are not making themselves available for vaccination. I personally think that any care worker not prepared to be vaccinated, unless because of a pre-existing medical condition, should not be allowed to operate in a care role.

It also seems that quite a high percentage of the non-vaccinated care staff are BAME. Last year there was a huge amount of hand wringing that BAME persons were being unfairly and disproportionately affected by COVID. Surely it cant help the position that BAME care workers are apparently disproportionately not doing their bit.

 

Agree with your first point.

With the second one, I think a lot of the drama was caused by misleading headlines making out that BAME are somehow more genetically susceptible to the virus than white people. The real issue is why a disproportionate number of BAME live in the kind of crowded conditions that make COVID more deadly. Obviously that comes down to a whole host of reasons, and there isn't one perfect solution.

I seem to recall similar headlines with the Grenfell Disaster. Again, race/ethnicity wasn't the primary issue there; it was social class. Yes, we need to figure out how to level out the ethnic imbalances within social classes, but I'm not a fan of headlines that fan the flames on all sides.

[maxjam]

3 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

That someone can't call it "absolutely horrific" that independent companies might choose to only employ people based on a legal selection criteria, if they're also going to complain when independent companies are regulated to adhere to things like the "Rooney Rule"

You either want companies to be free from overly-oppressive state regulation or you don't

Ah right, my last few posts have been about the vaccine protecting you - if others don't want to take it, thats on them.

Re. regulation I favour as little (and as accountable) as possible, obviously you have to have some otherwise there would be chaos.  I'm just not sure you can force mandatory injections on people however, either legally or via private companies insisting upon it without breaking anti-discrimination laws etc - especially given that by all accounts if you have had the vaccine (as I believe the vast majority will do anyway) you are fully protecting yourself against hospitalization or worse anyway. 

[Archied]

57 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Well I was using the word "half" figuratively to indicate a split - the precise details of that split, I don't pretend to know - nor could anyone

The problem is that the people in the latter group of "rebels" - and the reporting of their actions - have such a loud presence on social media, it can feel like a bigger problem than it is. Like you, I only see minimal amounts of mild rule-bending between my immediate friends/family but the news channels report every indiscretion with glee and the Icke-type ringleaders stoke up an army of keyboard warriors on social media who love to boast about how much they aren't following rules because they aren't "sheeple"

Now I can't even remember if you were trying to say people complying with rules was good or bad ?

 

Cant say I use social media , this is the only forum I use and that’s plain and simply because it’s Derby county ( perhaps not good idea getting involved in non football topics ) ,don’t use Facebook or Twitter,I go with what I see and hear around me in the main ,

where we differ is I’m not really into the tribal stuff and rhetoric like ,icke types ,ringleaders and armies of keyboard warriors stuff ,that’s going on from both sides of this and most other issues 

[GboroRam]

18 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Ah right, my last few posts have been about the vaccine protecting you - if others don't want to take it, thats on them.

Re. regulation I favour as little (and as accountable) as possible, obviously you have to have some otherwise there would be chaos.  I'm just not sure you can force mandatory injections on people however, either legally or via private companies insisting upon it without breaking anti-discrimination laws etc - especially given that by all accounts if you have had the vaccine (as I believe the vast majority will do anyway) you are fully protecting yourself against hospitalization or worse anyway. 

Don't forget there is a group of people who for whatever reason can't get the vaccine. For example people with immune system problems. The reason why herd immunity is important is for those people who for one reason or another can't take the vaccine. 

For the record I'm not in favour of mandatory vaccination. I don't care if people need a jab before they travel, that's nothing new and is the standard for a number of countries and a number of vaccinations. What we need to do is have an open discussion with the public in general about what vaccines are and how they work; be honest about their safety (that's not a guarantee it's safe - some people will be ill from a vaccination, but fleetingly small numbers) and talk science to educate those people who listen to pseudoscience that calls out incorrectly that vaccines are inherently dangerous.

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

For the record I'm not in favour of mandatory vaccination

And to be fair I dont think anyone posting in this thread is either. Or elsewhere- I've not seen anyone advocating for it anywhere.

It feels like it's only the usual media channels making it a debate for the sake of their ratings. People are literally arguing against an opinion that no one actually holds