Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
SammyK  
#1 Posted : 20 October 2020 07:53:05(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
SammyK

Morning All,

As the title says. I thought I understood the rules, but senior management in my place have now made me doubt myself.

We have a staff memeber who has tested COVID +, all teams members they came into contact with were sent out of the business whilst having COVID tests. All have come back negative. Because of the control measures in work, 2m distasncing, masks, sanitising etc.. if they are negative they are ok to come back to work? They have not been contacted by track and trace to isolate nor do they live with this person.

TIA

RVThompson  
#2 Posted : 20 October 2020 08:27:50(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
RVThompson

Hi Sammy,

unless they've changed the rules in the last five minutes, here is a link to current NHS guidance: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/self-isolation-and-treatment/when-to-self-isolate-and-what-to-do/

And also PHE self isolating guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-for-contacts-of-people-with-possible-or-confirmed-coronavirus-covid-19-infection-who-do-not-live-with-the-person/guidance-for-contacts-of-people-with-possible-or-confirmed-coronavirus-covid-19-infection-who-do-not-live-with-the-person

It would appear that you have to be notified by the NHS track and trace system.

As your guys have all tested negative, and have not been contacted, then yes, they can return to work.

thanks 3 users thanked RVThompson for this useful post.
webstar on 20/10/2020(UTC), nic168 on 22/10/2020(UTC), SammyK on 12/11/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 20 October 2020 08:49:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Interesting how you can read the guidance.

Positive test as an individual self isolate for ten days.

Exposed to someone who tested positive self isolate for fourteen days.

There does not appear to be any comment regarding a negative test result reducing the isolation period.

As with all testing there are caveats e.g. test too soon and the result could be incorrect so those negatives you anticipate being a release to return to work may not be so unless they were fourteen days before return and the people are not showing any symptoms.

Probably where the management think is coming from.

Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 20 October 2020 08:49:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Interesting how you can read the guidance.

Positive test as an individual self isolate for ten days.

Exposed to someone who tested positive self isolate for fourteen days.

There does not appear to be any comment regarding a negative test result reducing the isolation period.

As with all testing there are caveats e.g. test too soon and the result could be incorrect so those negatives you anticipate being a release to return to work may not be so unless they were fourteen days before return and the people are not showing any symptoms.

Probably where the management think is coming from.

Brian Hagyard  
#5 Posted : 20 October 2020 08:59:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

You are correct in that people only have to isolate when contacted by track and trace - however our local health team as asked us to get anyone we identify as close contacts to do it anyway! (cannot even follow their own guidance!)

oOnce isolating i think the guidance is clear - this is copyed from said guidance.

If contacted by NHS Test and Trace, your worker will need to isolate for the full 14 days from when they came into contact with the positive case. They will not be able to leave self-isolation early even if they are not symptomatic as it can take up to 14 days to develop symptoms.

They should not take a test if they are not symptomatic as this could generate a false negative and they may then go on to develop symptoms in the following days.

thanks 2 users thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 20/10/2020(UTC), Kate on 20/10/2020(UTC)
RVThompson  
#6 Posted : 20 October 2020 09:23:05(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
RVThompson

thanks 1 user thanked RVThompson for this useful post.
Kate on 20/10/2020(UTC)
Holliday42333  
#7 Posted : 20 October 2020 09:32:45(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Holliday42333

Sammy K; if you have robust 2m distancing in your workplace, how have the co-workers been identified as being in close contact?  Surely these workers have had occasion to become a close contact so could again.

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard Go to Quoted Post

If contacted by NHS Test and Trace, your worker will need to isolate for the full 14 days from when they came into contact with the positive case. They will not be able to leave self-isolation early even if they are not symptomatic as it can take up to 14 days to develop symptoms.

They should not take a test if they are not symptomatic as this could generate a false negative and they may then go on to develop symptoms in the following days.

This scenario happend recently in the Giro d'Italia cycle race.  A rider developed symptoms and tested positive so the whole team (riders & staff) were tested.  All were negative and remained at the race.  A few days later there was routing testing and 4 staff members tested positive, with the assumption that their infection hadn't developed sufficiently on the first test to show up.

Edited by user 20 October 2020 09:34:19(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

peter gotch  
#8 Posted : 20 October 2020 10:42:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Hi Sammy, I think the point is supposed to be that if you have all the right precautions in place and can thence maintain 2m social distancing in the workplace, then there would be not "close contacts" and hence the Track and Trace system would not contact those working near the person who has tested positive.

Hence, under the current rules these people working near should not have met the criteria for being also tested - unless working in very limited occupations such as care homes. So, e.g. front line medical staff in hospitals still not being routinely tested unless they have been in "close contact".

thanks 1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
Kate on 20/10/2020(UTC)
CptBeaky  
#9 Posted : 20 October 2020 10:46:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

We just had a situation wher a person was treated by an osteopath on Saturday. The osteopath had taken a COVID-19 test on the Friday (the day before). They then messaged our employee (on Monday) to say that the test had come back positive.

The employee was immediatly sent for a COVID test, which came back negative. None of the people involved have the Test n Trace app installed. This means, if you follow the guidelines as written, he doesn't have to self isolate. However this seems very counter intuitive to me. Surely this just means nobody should install the app?

From the NHS website...

When to self-isolate

Self-isolate immediately if:

None of these apply to this situation.

Cheeky Me  
#10 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:20:11(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Cheeky Me

Guys, we have a similar problem right now and I really don’t know what we are supposed to do.

On Friday one of our engineers felt unwell (not COVID symptoms), spent the morning in the welfare unit then travelled the 200 miles back home with his two co-workers. Over the weekend he was tested for COVID-19 and we now know this was positive.

I was of the opinion that we should send home the two other engineers he shares the vehicle with and also the additional two engineers he lives with Monday to Friday (shared accommodation). Yet I’m being told that they only need to self-isolate if they are contacted by NHS Test & Trace. Surely, if we know they have been in close contact with a positive case, then we should be sending them home…. to reduce further potential spread.  Why wait for a naffy system that fails to reach even half of associated contacts anyway?

This is total madness

Roundtuit  
#11 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:25:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

They would be treated as being in a bubble - one tests positive the rest isolate. Utter crap to rely on test and trace as it is not in every mobile, people do not sign in, people do not keep Bluetooth switched on and the information is handled in Excel.
thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 20/10/2020(UTC), A Kurdziel on 20/10/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#12 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:25:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

They would be treated as being in a bubble - one tests positive the rest isolate. Utter crap to rely on test and trace as it is not in every mobile, people do not sign in, people do not keep Bluetooth switched on and the information is handled in Excel.
thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 20/10/2020(UTC), A Kurdziel on 20/10/2020(UTC)
Brian Hagyard  
#13 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:36:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit Go to Quoted Post
They would be treated as being in a bubble - one tests positive the rest isolate. Utter crap to rely on test and trace as it is not in every mobile, people do not sign in, people do not keep Bluetooth switched on and the information is handled in Excel.

Track and trace does not depend only on the app - if you test posative they are sopposed to contact you (yes i know its not always happening)

As for it being UTTER CRAP - while i may agree with you in principle - the GUIDANCE is wait for track and trace!

thanks 1 user thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
CptBeaky on 21/10/2020(UTC)
Cheeky Me  
#14 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:37:50(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Cheeky Me

I agree, but even the government website doesn’t help, its so contradictory…..

In the FAQ’s it says “Contacts of a person who has tested positive for COVID-19 need to self-isolate at home because they are at risk of developing symptoms themselves in the next 14 days and could spread the virus to others before the symptoms begin”, but then goes on to say “Contacts who need to self-isolate will be notified and advised accordingly by the NHS Test and Trace service. If you have not been notified, this means you do not need to self-isolate.”

We know we have staff that have shared a house with someone who has tested positive…. But we are told to do nothing at all unless instructed to do so by Test & Trace? What on earth???

Kate  
#15 Posted : 20 October 2020 12:47:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Well, there is no rule that you can't self-isolate (or support your employees to self-isolate) just because you don't HAVE to self-isolate under the rules.

achrn  
#16 Posted : 20 October 2020 14:49:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post

Well, there is no rule that you can't self-isolate (or support your employees to self-isolate) just because you don't HAVE to self-isolate under the rules.


Exactly.  It seems to me that the guidance is that you should self-isolate if you had contact with someone now known to be infected.  However, the only legally-binding situation in which you must self-isolate is if you get an official instruction from a relevant person (of which a phone call from Test and Trace seems most likely).

It is in teh guidance that you shoudl isolate if sonmeone you live with is positive, which addresses some of the scenarios in the thread.

So, do you want to do the right thing for the good of society (follow the guidance) or just please yourself (and/or the accountants, shareholders, etc.) until the legal obligation is wheeled out (wait for T&T to catch up with you).

As was said up the thread, I think the reason the guidance doesn't say to isolate if a co-worker gets covid is because they have to maintain the line that workplaces that have followed governemnt guidance are 'covid secure', because they have to maintain the line that it's OK to go back to work (with measures in place).  You can't simultaneously claim that the government measures make the workplace covid secure, but that if anyone gets it then everyone else in the workplace needs to isolate.

thanks 1 user thanked achrn for this useful post.
Kate on 21/10/2020(UTC)
Cheeky Me  
#17 Posted : 20 October 2020 15:06:30(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Cheeky Me

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post

Well, there is no rule that you can't self-isolate (or support your employees to self-isolate) just because you don't HAVE to self-isolate under the rules.


So what do you do when there is a divide in opinion amongst the employees? With most insisting they should wait for test and trace, most likely as they dont want to receive a flat wage unless absolutely necessary etc...  

The current guidlines are completely useless. 

Roundtuit  
#18 Posted : 20 October 2020 15:32:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

If they can't work from home then they isolate at home.

This is one of the reasons HMG made available a payment (£500?) to ensure those who would likely attend work for money reasons have no need to.

It would be incredibly negligent on behalf of any employer to allow someone who may have the virus to enter the workplace, and depending upon the contract wording attending work with a transmittable disease is a probable disciplinary matter.

So any debate by your employees is immaterial - company policy rules.

Edited by user 20 October 2020 15:33:35(UTC)  | Reason: FFS

Roundtuit  
#19 Posted : 20 October 2020 15:32:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

If they can't work from home then they isolate at home.

This is one of the reasons HMG made available a payment (£500?) to ensure those who would likely attend work for money reasons have no need to.

It would be incredibly negligent on behalf of any employer to allow someone who may have the virus to enter the workplace, and depending upon the contract wording attending work with a transmittable disease is a probable disciplinary matter.

So any debate by your employees is immaterial - company policy rules.

Edited by user 20 October 2020 15:33:35(UTC)  | Reason: FFS

CptBeaky  
#20 Posted : 21 October 2020 09:08:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

So you suggest we send someone home, with no legal basis, on no money (you can only claim the £500 if you have test and trace), when they don't want to go home?

That seems strange, normally people would flag up the "see you in court" argument if this was suggested.

Roundtuit  
#21 Posted : 21 October 2020 09:45:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Must admit I am normally one of those voices however the post from Cheeky Me seemed to infer policy decision making is coming from an employees talking shop (tail wagging the dog) rather than through managerial lead by considered policy.

With a well written contract of employment there would be a legal basis for banning employees from site.

Roundtuit  
#22 Posted : 21 October 2020 09:45:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Must admit I am normally one of those voices however the post from Cheeky Me seemed to infer policy decision making is coming from an employees talking shop (tail wagging the dog) rather than through managerial lead by considered policy.

With a well written contract of employment there would be a legal basis for banning employees from site.

achrn  
#23 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:10:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post

So you suggest we send someone home, with no legal basis, on no money (you can only claim the £500 if you have test and trace), when they don't want to go home?

That seems strange, normally people would flag up the "see you in court" argument if this was suggested.


The difficulty seems to stem from the assumptions behind the 'no legal basis' comment.  It hasn't yet been established to what degree the government guidance has legal basis.  Nor has it been established what the correct interpretation of the contradictory parts of guidance is.  

Currently, the government guidance for households https://www.gov.uk/gover...virus-covid-19-infection is that people that live at the same address as someone that has tested positive should isolate.  As I read teh guidance, you don't need to wait to be told you are in the same household.

The guidance for not-households https://www.gov.uk/gover...not-live-with-the-person seems to be predicated on the assumption that Test and Trace is infallible.  Therefore, it says that "a person who has travelled in a small vehicle with someone who has tested positive for COVID-19" is a contact, and it says that contacts should isolate, but under "I think I have had contact with someone who has tested positive for COVID-19, but I have not been notified and advised to self-isolate. What should I do?" it says "Contacts who need to self-isolate will be notified".  It doesn't have as a FAQ 'I know for a fact I've had contact and should have been notified, but haven't, what should I do?'

So yes, we need to wait for a court case.

CptBeaky  
#24 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:24:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

For the record, we took the sensible approach and spoke with the person. They agreed the safest course of action was to self isolate. This is the approach we are taking, and thankfully everyone is on board at the moment.

My issue with even a well written contract (which we most certainly do not have here!) is that we would still be sending someone home without any legal basis. They have no symptoms, they have not been told to by a medical professional, the wording of the guidance very specifically states they do not need to. Can even a well written contract have "if we (unqualified as we are) suspect you may be contagious, we may send you home?

Remember the NHS site specifically says:-

You may want to tell people you've been in close contact with in the past 48 hours that you might have coronavirus. They do not need to self-isolate unless they're contacted by the NHS Test and Trace service.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/self-isolation-and-treatment/when-to-self-isolate-and-what-to-do/

Kate  
#25 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:25:58(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

ACAS have this:

https://www.acas.org.uk/coronavirus/self-isolation-and-sick-pay

Statutory sick pay of course is not all that much.

CptBeaky  
#26 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:44:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post

ACAS have this:

https://www.acas.org.uk/coronavirus/self-isolation-and-sick-pay

Statutory sick pay of course is not all that much.


  • they've been told to self-isolate by a doctor or NHS 111
  • they've been told to self-isolate by a government 'test and trace' service, because they've been in close contact with someone who tested positive ('NHS Test and Trace' in England, 'Test and Protect' in Scotland or 'Test, trace, protect' in Wales)

None of these apply to a person that is asked to isolate by an employer. i.e. because the employer knows they have been in close contact with an infected perosn. They still only apply to those told by a medical professional or contacted by an NHS app.

Roundtuit  
#27 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:55:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

So having identified their are gaps in your policies and procedures you:

a) Do nothing, after all this is everyone elses problem

b) Wait for the next revision to government guidance hoping it will address the questions

c) Take a managerial lead to close the gaps

If you have a COVID secure workplace then you will by default have a COVID Risk Assessment - a forseeable risk in a pandemic are employee contacts so what are your documented controls? These add to contractual terms and become your legal basis.

Roundtuit  
#28 Posted : 21 October 2020 10:55:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

So having identified their are gaps in your policies and procedures you:

a) Do nothing, after all this is everyone elses problem

b) Wait for the next revision to government guidance hoping it will address the questions

c) Take a managerial lead to close the gaps

If you have a COVID secure workplace then you will by default have a COVID Risk Assessment - a forseeable risk in a pandemic are employee contacts so what are your documented controls? These add to contractual terms and become your legal basis.

CptBeaky  
#29 Posted : 21 October 2020 11:43:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Sorry Roundtuit, I am not sure I am getting my point across well enough.

We do have the controls. Recently we had our first positive test, it appears this person was ill several days before they lost their sense of smell, so only then got the test (no high temp or cough). Nobody else has tested positive since. Therefore, so far there is no evidence that our controls are not working.

My query was about someone having contact outside of work. If they are not traced by the app, they don't have to self isolate. This is not up for debate, it is in black and white on all the relevant sites. It is not presumption by absence, the wording actually states you do NOT have to isolate, unless you are contacted. How would you word a clause in the contract that states that we can, without any warning or evidence, and against all guidance, send you home on no pay, should we suspect that, outside of work hours, you have come into contact with an infected person?

Would you be able to use the same logic to ban a person because of drug taking, without actually giving them a test? Afterall, we all know they went to a party at the weekend and drugs were present.

Quote:

Utter crap to rely on test and trace as it is not in every mobile, people do not sign in, people do not keep Bluetooth switched on and the information is handled in Excel.

As I have said before, the guidelines are very clear. They are also very stupid. Unfortunatly, the rules being stupid is not an accepted reason not to follow them.

Captcha QKJK - not a bad poker hand

A Kurdziel  
#30 Posted : 21 October 2020 12:38:28(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Interesting point Cpt Beaky!

If someone comes early into work and spots a security guard in their hut smoking a joint do they a) take immediate disciplinary action b) taken note  of the situation but not act until they have a positive drugs test c) ask for a drag and hope if they think enough positive thoughts all this Covid stuff will disappear in a puff of smoke?

Discuss with examples

Brian Hagyard  
#31 Posted : 21 October 2020 13:42:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard


Are we straying away from the point here?

For me, the Guidance is clear – isolate with symptoms (or
living with someone with symptoms) or when told to do so by Track and Trace –
if we do that, we are following the Guidance.

Once someone has been told to isolate by track and trace – I
believe it becomes a legal requirement, and they can be prosecuted for not doing
so – just like returning from another country (I will happily be corrected on
that.)

Like every other part of H&S, if we follow the Guidance,
we are fulfilling our legal duty – (but perhaps not our moral duty!)

If we choose to do more than the Guidance, then fantastic –
but how many times have we had discussions about the limitations on what we can
legally ask from our colleagues – especially when it comes to Health Records,
etc.

If we follow the Guidance and make someone isolate for 14
days after track and trace have said so, I believe we could potentially put
them on SSP . But if we take that decision ourselves and then pay just SSP I'm
not sure how that would stand up in a tribunal – but then I'm not an HR expert.

For me, we need to be careful that we distinguish between
what we Could, Should, and Must do. I would never criticise someone for going
that extra mile (if legal) but neither would I criticise someone for following the guidance to the letter.


thanks 2 users thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 21/10/2020(UTC), RVThompson on 21/10/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#32 Posted : 21 October 2020 21:07:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

With the expressed degree of uncertainity around guidance and/or legislation for Covid anyone care to speculate just how "on gods green earth" any company has managed to derive and implement a Drugs and Alcohol Policy?

There is nothing in UK statute requring an employee to be sober for work EXCEPTING where such employment falls foul of specific rules e.g. driving on the public highway. Even the chancellor may legally drink when presenting their budget to Westminister.

There is nothing in UK statute requiring an employee NOT to be under the influence of drugs at work EXCEPTING where such employment falls foul of specific rules e.g. driving on the public highway.

So to have enacted such a "policy" the business has documented and communicated a position employees must adhere to - so where is the problem? Other than having omitted to document and communicate.

Roundtuit  
#33 Posted : 21 October 2020 21:07:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

With the expressed degree of uncertainity around guidance and/or legislation for Covid anyone care to speculate just how "on gods green earth" any company has managed to derive and implement a Drugs and Alcohol Policy?

There is nothing in UK statute requring an employee to be sober for work EXCEPTING where such employment falls foul of specific rules e.g. driving on the public highway. Even the chancellor may legally drink when presenting their budget to Westminister.

There is nothing in UK statute requiring an employee NOT to be under the influence of drugs at work EXCEPTING where such employment falls foul of specific rules e.g. driving on the public highway.

So to have enacted such a "policy" the business has documented and communicated a position employees must adhere to - so where is the problem? Other than having omitted to document and communicate.

Kate  
#34 Posted : 22 October 2020 06:45:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

Compliance with drugs and alcohol policy is very likely to be signed for in an employment contract.

No one ever thought of putting in an employment contract the prospect that an employee might have to confine themselves to their home for two weeks for reasons of public health.

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 22/10/2020(UTC)
CptBeaky  
#35 Posted : 22 October 2020 11:47:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel Go to Quoted Post

Interesting point Cpt Beaky!

If someone comes early into work and spots a security guard in their hut smoking a joint do they a) take immediate disciplinary action b) taken note  of the situation but not act until they have a positive drugs test c) ask for a drag and hope if they think enough positive thoughts all this Covid stuff will disappear in a puff of smoke?

Discuss with examples


I think the correct analogy is that you smell cannabis in the vicinity of the transport office. You then see a flt driver nearby. He has no drugs on him, he doesn't seem to be stoned in anyway (no slow speech, no dilated pupils etc.). You don't have a test kit available. Do you send him home on no pay just in case he is a danger or do you accept that your power's are limited in this situation and just monitor the situation?

I would want to send him home, but could I? Remember this is on zero pay, so in effect suspension.

thanks 1 user thanked CptBeaky for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 22/10/2020(UTC)
Brian Hagyard  
#36 Posted : 22 October 2020 12:26:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

while this is an intersting discussion - how did the workings (or not workings) of the Track and trace to enforce self ioslation become a descusion about canabis?

Dont know what some people are on but can i have some?

Xavier123  
#37 Posted : 23 October 2020 11:48:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Xavier123

Regardless of where we get to with this, I feel beholden to highlight that 'Track and Trace' is the domain of the Royal Mail.

https://www3.royalmail.com/track-your-item#/

The original plan involved 'tracking' but look how well that worked out. It's become a ubiquitous but inaccurate way of describing the arrangements. We're stuck with quite a few legacy decisions of this Government.

thanks 1 user thanked Xavier123 for this useful post.
Kate on 23/10/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#38 Posted : 23 October 2020 11:49:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post
(you can only claim the £500 if you have test and trace)

and the drama rumbles on...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54660237

"People who are told to go into isolation in an alert from the NHS Covid-19 app in England and Wales will not be eligible for government support."

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Kate on 23/10/2020(UTC), Kate on 23/10/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#39 Posted : 23 October 2020 11:49:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post
(you can only claim the £500 if you have test and trace)

and the drama rumbles on...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54660237

"People who are told to go into isolation in an alert from the NHS Covid-19 app in England and Wales will not be eligible for government support."

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
Kate on 23/10/2020(UTC), Kate on 23/10/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#40 Posted : 23 October 2020 11:57:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post
No one ever thought of putting in an employment contract the prospect that an employee might have to confine themselves to their home for two weeks for reasons of public health.

Would we have a public health act if Covid is the first occurrence where quarantine was required?

It is still within living memory that sanitoria were used for TB treatment.

Roundtuit  
#41 Posted : 23 October 2020 11:57:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: Kate Go to Quoted Post
No one ever thought of putting in an employment contract the prospect that an employee might have to confine themselves to their home for two weeks for reasons of public health.

Would we have a public health act if Covid is the first occurrence where quarantine was required?

It is still within living memory that sanitoria were used for TB treatment.

Brian Hagyard  
#42 Posted : 23 October 2020 12:47:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

Originally Posted by: Xavier123 Go to Quoted Post

Regardless of where we get to with this, I feel beholden to highlight that 'Track and Trace' is the domain of the Royal Mail.

https://www3.royalmail.com/track-your-item#/

The original plan involved 'tracking' but look how well that worked out. It's become a ubiquitous but inaccurate way of describing the arrangements. We're stuck with quite a few legacy decisions of this Government.

Ok Xavier we mean Test and Trace!



thanks 1 user thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
Xavier123 on 23/10/2020(UTC)
Kate  
#43 Posted : 23 October 2020 13:52:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

One major difference from TB is that it was only people who were sick with it and needed treatment anyway that would be isolated.  If you were coughing up blood then you were presumably too ill to go to work.  Nowadays people with no Covid symptoms at all who feel themselves to be in perfect health are expected to isolate on the basis that they may be infected without knowing it. This isn't what our sick pay system or our employment contracts were designed for.

On the other hand, in Hilary Mantel's historical novel Wolf Hall,there is a resonant story for today.  Thomas Cromwell's wife has died of the "sweat" (an infectious disease in which you get a fever and quickly die).  As Mantel tells it:

"The rule is for the household to hang a bunch of straw outside the door as a sign of infection, and then restrict entry for forty days, and go abroad as little as possible.

Mercy [a relative] comes in and says, a fever, it could be any fever, we don't have to admit to the sweat ... If we all stayed at home, London would come to a standstill.

'No,' he says. 'We must do it.  My lord cardinal made these rules and it would not be proper for me to scant them.'"

thanks 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
stevedm on 24/10/2020(UTC)
stevedm  
#44 Posted : 24 October 2020 10:33:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

....just had one guy tell me he has been contacted by UK track and Trace (he is now in China!)....he got a text on Friday saying he must isolate for 14 days...then and call today to say that he must isolate from the time he was in contact with the person who tested positive, which was 12 days ago...'don't worry (says the caller)..you only have 2 days to go in isolation'...that's good says our guy, but what about the 8 other places I have been in the past 12 days...?

He had a negative PCR test when entering Germany and China...we do it on all our HCID teams anyway..

Just as a reminder that it is from the time you were in contact with the person who tested positive not when contacted by Track and trace... 

Justin M. Jackson  
#45 Posted : 24 October 2020 16:33:26(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Justin M. Jackson

Do nothing, after all this is everyone elses problem, support your employees to self-isolate

Roundtuit  
#46 Posted : 24 October 2020 18:54:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Reported

Roundtuit  
#47 Posted : 24 October 2020 18:54:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Reported

Bigmac1  
#48 Posted : 26 October 2020 16:20:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bigmac1

You will be contacted by test and trace if you have been in close proximetry for 15 mins of face to face contact.

So even if you do not have the app or contacted by the government, you can easily apply this in your workplace for you to decide if they need to self isolate.

Just because you have walked in the same corridor at some time during the day does not mean you have to self isolate or workplaces would be deserted.

Users browsing this topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.