Matt Hancock's statement on returning to work

[JS87]

So I've just read that Matt Hancock has said that there is no excuse not to return to work as there is little evidence of transmission at work and transmission is happening in homes. Given that most of the country has been furloughed/ is working from home then obviously transmission is likely to be happening at home rather than the work place. In workplaces that have stayed open people have either been using PPE (NHS) or social distancing or there have been large outbreaks (e.g. meat processing plants). Given there have been relatively few offices open with everyone crammed back in as normal then I can't understand why he thinks there is evidence that there would be no transmission in these situations. Does he not use his brain?

Most of the country furloughed or working from home? Do you have evidence to support that statement? All of my friends and family have been working throughout, outside the home, in shops, offices, hospitals and factories.
I know nobody personally who has had covid, except for one friend’s mother, a pensioner who did not work.

Ok, sorry maybe "most of the country" is an exaggeration but actually most people I know have been working from home. I think that most businesses which have stayed open have been social distancing (except maybe shops) or used PPE or there have been outbreaks (factories). Whilst shop workers maybe do come up close with a lot of customers they generally aren't within 2 metres for more than 15 minutes with any one person, whereas in an office with recirculating air people are often sat very close together for the whole day. I think he is referring to getting the people who are working from home back to the office so these were the people I was talking about when I said furloughed/working from home.

Our office has been fully open for the past six weeks, associates that’s we we work with are all business as usual. Shops have been open all the time, bar staff are back at work. People have gone back to work,

I read this morning in the guardian that the spike in Oldham was down to three generations of familys living in one house in very tight terraced houses.

@Chezacheza

Our office has been fully open for the past six weeks, associates that’s we we work with are all business as usual. Shops have been open all the time, bar staff are back at work. People have gone back to work,

I read this morning in the guardian that the spike in Oldham was down to three generations of familys living in one house in very tight terraced houses.

I’ve quoted that wrong.

It’s multiples homes with three generations of families in. It’s spreading through the family - not work colleagues.

Great so does that mean all medical departments at hospitals will be open for appointments, all injections being done (b12 for example), scans and face to face appointments with Gp’s and consultants?

I've been working right through in an office, we've only just started to wear masks in the corridors but. not in the actual office. No-one has had covid (touch wood).

Good job he doesn't have a job where he's responsible for people's mental health or anything. What really worries me about that view is that he is completely disregarding peoples fears and worries and their fractured mental health.

I think he’s largely likely to be right - most workplaces will have implemented procedures to reduce risk of spread i.e. maximum numbers in meeting rooms etc. And most people in offices don’t sit particularly close to others - at my work there’s at least a metre distance between everyone. This is very different to socialising - when I’ve met friends for dinner we’ve all sat in much closer quarters than we would in an office environment. Presumably families are also hugging etc. Which has probably caused more spread.

@MaverickSnoopy

Good job he doesn't have a job where he's responsible for people's mental health or anything. What really worries me about that view is that he is completely disregarding peoples fears and worries and their fractured mental health.

What should he be doing? People can’t stay on furlough forever.

And schools will all be back in a couple of weeks anyway.

I read this morning in the guardian that the spike in Oldham was down to three generations of familys living in one house in very tight terraced houses.

Yep. The spike is in two very specific wards and has been attributed mainly to extended families living and socialising together.
I'm classed as Oldham but my ward has hardly any cases at all and none in at least the last 5 weeks. Most people in my village have been working ( some from home but I also know a lot of healthcare workers and others who have worked out of the home throughout) plus we're all using the local pubs and restaurants.

@MaverickSnoopy
If you can't see how returning to some level of social contact will boost the mental health of many it is a good job that you aren't in charge of mental health. It will be good for the vast majority of those people who are irrationally too scared to go out to be forced out of their houses in a controlled way so that they can begin to benefit from the well known effects of social interaction.

But he's not saying "go back to work as normal and don't bother with social distancing" is he?

@JS87

So I've just read that Matt Hancock has said that there is no excuse not to return to work as there is little evidence of transmission at work and transmission is happening in homes. Given that most of the country has been furloughed/ is working from home then obviously transmission is likely to be happening at home rather than the work place. In workplaces that have stayed open people have either been using PPE (NHS) or social distancing or there have been large outbreaks (e.g. meat processing plants). Given there have been relatively few offices open with everyone crammed back in as normal then I can't understand why he thinks there is evidence that there would be no transmission in these situations. Does he not use his brain?

It’s a bit like saying you don’t catch it in schools, really.

If you have a long lockdown and then reintroduce tiny numbers of children and teachers back in, with the ability to social distance, you could extrapolate from that, that schools are ‘safe’. Like workplaces.

Get everyone back at full capacity overnight with no masks and throw in all the vulnerable people who have been shielding, who knows what will happen!

If teachers are safe in overcrowded stuffy buildings with members of thousand plus different households who’ve traveled in on buses and trains then I guess offices must be world beatingly safe.

Same bullshit as them saying transmission by children is low. Yes, because they have been at home for months.

It’s fine if there is the space for workplaces to adhere to the guidance he and others in the Government tell us we have to adhere to

But for some businesses it’s not possible for all staff to go back, but I know lots are now back at work rather than wfh

However I also think now businesses can see it can work wfh they are happy to allow this to continue as workers get a better work/life balance and also helps them cut down on costs

No evidence YET. When we all troop back to offices there will either be a spike or there won't. If there is a spike they might conduct research to see where the outbreak originated from. Then again they might not.

I miss the office cos I like the social aspects and in some ways it is easier to get things done - quick chat across the desk etc.... but it is not essential.

I agree that to some extent we need to put our toe in the water to see what can we do but carefully and with the acceptance that we might need to retreat.

Problem here is people simply don't trust the gov and will continue to work from home as much as they can. Trust goes a long way. If people are behind you then you can progress forward together.

It’s fine if there is the space for workplaces to adhere to the guidance he and others in the Government tell us we have to adhere to

But schools don’t need adhere to any if this guidance as there is no space to do so, and that seems to be just fine.

@Reallybadidea

But he's not saying "go back to work as normal and don't bother with social distancing" is he?

Well, except to school staff.

Is he saying people should be back working (ie not furloughed) or people should be back physically at the office?
If the latter, saying there's "no excuse" sounds a little stupid. One big excuse would surely be an office with too many people to follow the government guidelines, space-wise. Is he suggesting those people have "no excuse". I'm not fussed, I like wfh but I'll go back when I'm asked, but these are the government guidelines, so if he's suggesting they don't count as a reason to continue wfh then what is the point in them? Or have they been scrapped?
If he just meant the furlough thing then obviously ignore what I've said.

How do you social distance in a packed commuter’s train??
We could start by saying no more furlough so some people will go back to their workplaces but the ones who can fully do their job WFH should continue. We then assess the workplace transmission (including commute transmission!) if low then WFH people start coming back as well.

So more people can cram on the buses with the school kids, that will be good!

Maybe they want more people back in the offices etc so when rates rise they can blame that rather than schools, because as we all know schools have magic powers that mean the virus can't be transmitted in them.

Perhaps now we can agree this government would fuck us all over. We're back to herd immunity.

Okay, so if 3 generations of 1 family in close proximity can give covid to each other,

then why cannot covid pass between school students (especially secondary aged ones) to and from parents or teachers?

When there are dozens, hundreds or even thousands of people in 1 building for 35 hours per week, for most of the year?

With very little social distancing?

Is there a magic school fairy that is supposed to stop this?