£1000 fine for not self isolating. Yeah, right.

[Sarahlou63]

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/19/10000-fines-warning-for-failing-to-self-isolate-as-covid-infections-soar

@Triangularbubble

Well there’s an incentive for people not to get tested, give fake numbers in restaurants and never answer their phones....

Anyone not planning to isolate following a positive result is unlikely to get tested even without fines tbf - why go to the effort if you're going to ignore the result anyway?

@HeIenaDove

UC IS NOT just an out of work benefit. If people have ALREADY lost money they wont be able to afford to self isolate.............perhaps this is part of the reason cases have gone up in that region.

I know it's not an out of work benefit, I didn't say it was, stop shouting.

Yes, agreed people won't self isolate, already seeing that in the low paid teams I work with.

But your original point was that if they self isolate they can't go to UC meetings and will be sanctioned. That won't happen. Meetings have been suspended. And anyway, as UC isn't an out of work benefit it doesn't even have meetings and sanctions so you're talking shit.

People who were working part time absolutely had to go to appointments and prove that they were trying to increase their hours in the same workplace or try to get another job to increase the hours.

UC doesnt have sanctions? Oh my!!!!!!

Either way, you were wrong - attending meetings for UC or JSA has been suspended. So your catch 22 scenario doesn't exist.

Anyone not planning to isolate following a positive result is unlikely to get tested even without fines tbf - why go to the effort if you're going to ignore the result anyway

Agree and it’s a sad indication of society when selfish behaviour can lead to the spread of virus to others.

Maybe employers need stricter measures so they don’t let people work if showing symptoms, know they have been been abroad etc.

I suppose it’s good that a least some will get help with the £500 especially as it does seem to affect those working in places like food manufacturing which I guess would be the type of people eligible. These are often the people forced to work by employers and it should be a much higher fine than £1000 for them

So potentially some poor sod on UC has the choice of
a. being fined £10"000 if they dont self isolate.
b. being sanctioned if they do self isolate so cant go to any appointments.

No, they have all appointments over the phone.

Oh sorry, I see that’s been addressed.

I think they should create a Covid workforce from across the political boundaries to work out the way forward, before things get out of hand

As the Opposition isn't coming up with any ideas for how they would manage things differently, I'm not sure this would produce any differences at all.

It's important the Opposition points out failings by the government. But this recent practice that they don't put forward their own ideas for different/better ways of doing things - at the time things need doing and matching the pace of events - just leaves them looking a bit of an empty vessel. I think that's a shame.

But, it's also the case that governments of every hue round the world are doing very similar things (including sanctions for those who do not comply with infection control measures). So I'm not sure a new cross-party group would actually make much difference. Unless it included the clear repudiation of Cummings.

@Radwitch

www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

If you’re going to introduce such heavy handed fines, you need to have a test which is very accurate. The PCR test gives a very high percentage of false positives! This is really a crapshoot at this point.

It doesn't say the test is no good. It says it is very good indeed!

What CT is the standard in British labs?

(The article is discussing US practice)

I think the government is clutching at straws, this will entail people reporting each other and can’t possibly be policed

I don't know how anyone would know you were meant to be at home if you didn't tell them.

Only slight risk is around schools - if a child has been sent home, it's likely other parents will find that out, and if they then see you out and about, they may report you.

I really think they should reduce the period from 14 days to 7 days unless you have symptoms. They'll catch most cases and there will be better compliance.

I don’t think anyone would have a clue if I was supposed to be isolating as I am retired so who would I tell. I probably wouldn’t bother with a test if I couldn’t get a home test and just stay in for 2 weeks if I had symptoms as I would probably feel ill anyway.

@Triangularbubble

Well there’s an incentive for people not to get tested, give fake numbers in restaurants and never answer their phones....

Well I hope the people that do this don't dare whinge when EVERYONE gets locked down again because of their selfishness.

Should we presume Dominic Cummings fine is in the post?

Won’t work. People just won’t bother being tested.

"I really think they should reduce the period from 14 days to 7 days unless you have symptoms. They'll catch most cases and there will be better compliance"

I agree.

I also think the super spreader from Bolton should be fined because theres already a designated penalty for failing to quarantine when returning from a country with quarantine restrictions in place.

@Fortyfifty

"I really think they should reduce the period from 14 days to 7 days unless you have symptoms. They'll catch most cases and there will be better compliance"

I agree.

I also think the super spreader from Bolton should be fined because theres already a designated penalty for failing to quarantine when returning from a country with quarantine restrictions in place.

I agree with both of these points. The superspreader from Bolton is a clear cut case, he should be given the maximum fine.

@Ranunculi

People who are not on “low incomes” also can’t afford to lose the money from self isolating. You might earn £1k per week but you probably have financial commitments equal to that amount, like an expensive mortgage or car or school fees. Just because you’re on a higher income doesn’t mean you can afford to lose two weeks salary.

Are you suggesting the taxpayer should fork out to pay school fees and car payments? This is taking the piss now. People on very low wages need help to buy food and pay gas and electric and basic bills, not extras.

7 days wouldn't really be enough for an incubation period of 2-14 days, even though the mode is 5-6 days.

We need a proper medical number cruncher to work out how many incubate for 10 days or more, to see if it would be safe to move the isolation/quarantine end point.

But without better outbreak tracking, does enough data exist to reasonable confidence in the numbers? Perhaps there are better data sets elsewhere in Europe?

Until we know, and whilst cases are rising, it would be a good move to introduce yet another new procedure, especially one which carries some additional risk

I remember the "it's totally unenforceable" argument being used about banning smoking indoors.

Boorish blokes suggesting they would need a policeman in every pub.

It turns out that's not how it works.

Or...people could just self isolate 🙄

My concern is that this only applies to people who have been told to self-isolate by NHS Test & Trace.

So, if you have symptoms but feel you can't self-isolate (or there's someone in your house who can't) all you need to do to avoid the fine is not get tested.

do people really have zero contingency in case they can't work?
Many don’t. They’re mortgaged to the hilt and are only one paycheck away from disaster. In an emergency they’d use their credit cards. That’s not a situation anyone wants to be in. If someone feels healthy they aren’t going to put themselves in debt by sitting at home for a fortnight.

Are you suggesting the taxpayer should fork out to pay school fees and car payments?
Of course not. I’m just pointing out that it’s not only the poor who don’t have money to spare. The middle classes quite often have financial commitments equal to their incomes and can’t afford to lose their salary for a few weeks. I think this is a key point when asking why people won’t self isolate.

Only slight risk is around schools - if a child has been sent home, it's likely other parents will find that out, and if they then see you out and about, they may report you.

I understand this has happened at a school near me. The head found out and has gone ballistic.