Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS
Collapse
X
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Well because this isn't a binary choice she faces, quit and spill the beans vs stay in the job and keep quiet.Originally posted by xsnaggle View PostI'm not arguing with that, it makes perfect sense. So why does she then go on the BBC and complain about the job? Why not keep her mouth shut and take the money?
Have you thought that maybe her ideal outcome is to stay in the role and become busy and useful?
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Is the right answer.Originally posted by trampie09 View PostI've told you, feeling guilty perhaps, perhaps she would rather do a fair days work for a fair days pay rather than do little work for a fair days pay at the taxpayers expense but she can't afford to give the job up.
She would have to be daft or irresponsible to either resign or keep quiet whilst the country's main public health initiative is operating so poorly. Good on her.
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Absolutely, that would be the optimum result. But when it gets busy no doubt she will be busy. Lets be reasonable here. Most people would be quite happy to be paid and do less rather than be paid and do more. I like to be busy myself when I work but when it's not busy I don't feel the urge to broadcast it to the world.Originally posted by Eric Cartman View PostWell because this isn't a binary choice she faces, quit and spill the beans vs stay in the job and keep quiet.
Have you thought that maybe her ideal outcome is to stay in the role and become busy and useful?
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
But you don't know it is operating so poorly, you just assume it is because she is not busy. someone said it was a waste of public money and I used the analogy of the the emergency hospitals. Because they have been grossly underused does that mean they were a waste of taxpayers money? She was employed as one of the number of operatives deemed likely to be needed if and when it gets busy.Originally posted by jon1959 View PostIs the right answer.
She would have to be daft or irresponsible to either resign or keep quiet whilst the country's main public health initiative is operating so poorly. Good on her.
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Amazingly, you are not the barometer for the rest of the working population.Originally posted by xsnaggle View PostAbsolutely, that would be the optimum result. But when it gets busy no doubt she will be busy. Lets be reasonable here. Most people would be quite happy to be paid and do less rather than be paid and do more. I like to be busy myself when I work but when it's not busy I don't feel the urge to broadcast it to the world.
I'm currently doing a full day's work but been reduced to 5 hours pay. Now, I could follow your example and quit, or laze around - or I can just knuckle down and help my company get through this. Even in normal times, at quiet periods I'd still be looking for ways to help the company. After all, they are paying my wages.
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Fair point, but with respect this work is not as intrinsically skilled. People are doing it from home. You could argue that it would be quicker to get people online to work this role as and when demand warrants it, than it would be to suddenly increase hospital beds.Originally posted by xsnaggle View PostBut you don't know it is operating so poorly, you just assume it is because she is not busy. someone said it was a waste of public money and I used the analogy of the the emergency hospitals. Because they have been grossly underused does that mean they were a waste of taxpayers money? She was employed as one of the number of operatives deemed likely to be needed if and when it gets busy.
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
It’s early doors but this article suggests only 38% of reported contacts of people diagnosed with Coronavirus were reached during the first few days of the new system. With a Government target of 80% for the system to be effective.
Hopefully just early bedding-in issues if correct: https://www.newscientist.com/article...-be-effective/
Comment
-
Re: Coronavirus update
Despite chasing up, I didn't even get a result of my test which was over a month ago. No doubt I figured in the statistics of tests being carried out but it seems to have got lost in the system, a less than rare occurrence, I was advised.Originally posted by Baloo View PostIt’s early doors but this article suggests only 38% of reported contacts of people diagnosed with Coronavirus were reached during the first few days of the new system. With a Government target of 80% for the system to be effective.
Hopefully just early bedding-in issues if correct: https://www.newscientist.com/article...-be-effective/
Comment
-
-
Re: Coronavirus update
I didn’t realise they sent 15000 oldies out of hospital into care homes back in March to free up space, thus infecting so many people in care homes which is half the deaths isn’t it?Originally posted by trampie09 View PostIt's all relative but the UK's figures are shockingly bad.
Comment
Quick Navigation
Collapse


Comment