The Irish Times have a diverting little article today about the removal of the statue of Queen Victoria which used to stand in Dublin in front of the Dáil and wasn't removed until 1948!
I found that amazing in the current context - the orthodoxy in recent days is that statue-toppling is a necessity and inevitability in the sort of circumstances that saw Irish independence from Britain - but apparently a statue of George II survived until 1937, Nelson until 1966 and there is still a statue of Prince Albert, and an arch commemorating the part played by the Royal Irish Fusiliers in the Second Boer War, if not others I haven't come across yet.
But the U.K. had the good sense to kick him out for his sins
Fathering a son on your wife is not generally considered a sin. I am sure even Justin would consider that acceptable although he might have something to say about James’ - ahem - extra marital activities.
That was just the proximate cause not the real reason
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
I've WFH in both consulting and for the vast majority of time in my own biz too.
Its MUCH easier for the latter, than the former. Can't imagine working on a change project/programme without being immersed in that business...
On WFH, our staff survey shows four-fifths want to carry on WFH for at least part of the week. One of the primary reasons why people want to go in to the office is social interaction with colleagues.
Does this count as data, or just anecdata?
I imagine, for a lot of people, a 2 day commuting week would be very desirable. The other 3 days you work from home
Trouble is, why would any company sustain all the expenses of an office which is so underused? They won't.
The more I think about it, the more I think core Central Business Districts, in the west, with big tall towers, are fecked. Bad news for a lot of American cities (not great for London)
London will reinvent; it always does. And a London reinventing with the available infrastructure intact and not bombed out could be ace. Two other thoughts;
1 London has kind of grown itself into a dead end. It's a city state that only works by sucking the life out of a large chunk of South East England. And a lot of the people you need to make the city work simply can't dream of paying their own way there.
2 If the future of London is as a national hub, a place where more people go once or twice a week, what are the social implications? Suppose the way that people work in London is early train from Smalltown, a day of face-to-face, a meal, a show and the last train home? I can see the attractions. But one of the things that makes big cities interesting is the sense of anonymity. WFH+ could send that through the roof...
Incidentally, that frequently describes my trips to Town.
2 hour train journey, a 4-6 hours work, drinks, dinner with some mates, sometimes a show. Sometimes a kip over to work again the next day. Sometimes back on the last train. It is great fun. Probably 6-8 days a month.
Selfishly (I have to admit), I AM looking forward to the decent hotels being sub £200 mid-week, though, because of less biz travel. Heck, they might be sub £100 for a while. I remember it being like that in 09/10...
Will be fascinating to see what happens to property prices. Long thought about a pied a terre in South Ken sort of area, but has become unaffordable in recent years.
Who gives a crap about London, perhaps they will do something sensible and stop it sucking the life out of the rest of the country, can only be good.
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
It’s not the broadband I’m worried about. I’m talking about space really. Even 3 bedroom houses built within the last 30 years (hundreds of thousands of them) you’d struggle with.
If many people are going to be WFH all or almost all of the time, why do they need to be in the UK at all? Why not somewhere sunnier, at least for the winter months? Somewhere with much lower property prices and maybe lower taxes, as long as it has a decent internet connection.
Quite - the time difference may or may not be an issue. I could probably work anywhere in Europe (say plus or minus 2 hours from UK time).
For some sectors, it may not matter at all.
It's absolute wishful thinking.
In every meeting I've ever been in the people in the room have the advantage over the people on the other end of the phone.
Humanity doesn't work via video link. Check ins work, between people who already know each other. But building a team, building trust, looking someone in the eye and knowing they've got this - ain't gonna happen over a webcam.
This is true. Although I suppose it could change if digital becomes the norm.
The thing is, even if digital becomes the norm, the people in the room will have the advantage - in terms of nonverbal cues and greater immediate presence. Therefore it will always be in their interest to be in the room.
The only way digital will work long term is if absolutely nobody is in the same room. And I don't think that is going to happen.
In my experience, the job happens in the pub after work, in the informal chat, in the coffee after dinner. Webcams and Microsoft Teams aren't about to replace that.
Most if not all of my colleagues broke lockdown long before it was over to discuss what's what. If you're not in the room you're not in the game.
Pure anecdote, but I've found it EASIER to buy at auction remotely.
The petty rivalries, sense of hierarchy, 'I won't let him get such and such so cheaply, so I'll bid again' syndrome, is all subverted.
As you say, though, that won't necessarily be the case when it IS possible to go back to bidding in person.
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
I've WFH in both consulting and for the vast majority of time in my own biz too.
Its MUCH easier for the latter, than the former. Can't imagine working on a change project/programme without being immersed in that business...
There are definitely jobs you could not do it full time, but lots you could do a good part of the time. I do mostly financials and coaching so no issue doing it from home.
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
I live in a large double fronted semi and have a (small) desk in the corner of the dining room. Suspect that being stuck so close to screens in a confined space probably isn't good for my eyes, but it's my space during the day. Several of my colleagues have had to set up in the kitchen, younger team member has all 3 in a house share WFH with one drawing the short straw of being in their bedroom. Old colleague has bought and built a large shed he intends to kit out as the garden office (don't tell the local scroats...)
Houses and flats have been built for the old way of doing things. An office space can be incorporated into designs going forward
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
It’s not the broadband I’m worried about. I’m talking about space really. Even 3 bedroom houses built within the last 30 years (hundreds of thousands of them) you’d struggle with.
Yes can imagine if you have young family it would be an issue.
In Edinburgh primary school pupils will be in 4 days out of 3 weeks. 1,1,2 over the 3 weeks. Whole days. Fridays will be for the teachers to offer increased work from home support. We'll find out at the end of June our rotas.
I think the same style for secondary pupils as well but it is on a subject by subject basis for what that means for teaching.
That's rubbish. The dereliction of duty to kids by all governments in the UK has been disgraceful. The teachers need to be ordered back to work or face the dole queue.
It's not the teachers doing this you pillock it's the government. You cannot send kids back to school. So says the the government guidelines which are explicit and unambiguous about social distancing
It absolutely is the teachers. They were popping champagne corks at the NUT when the government announced it had capitulated. The social distancing guidelines are also a disaster and you'll find no defense of them from me, primarily it is the teachers and their unions not wanting to go to work.
As I said, they either report for work tomorrow or stick them in the dole queue.
I get the frustration- I've got one going back 2 days a week this week and the other one at home for the foreseeable future. It's not good. And I'm sure that the unions have pushed their luck on this. But consider that a Conservative government with an 80 seat majority and a reputation for ruthlessness has been outwitted by teacher unions. There are a few reasons.
First (and I know I go on about this a lot) the UK government hasn't done well at reducing the amount of virus in society. France is back to business as usual in a week's time, because they've had fewer deaths and infections recently. Our government has been rubbish, and I suspect it's because they are led by populists who won't do anything to upset the public. So our lockdown has always been half-hearted, less effective, so it has to drag on for longer.
Second, by pushing wishful thinking, it's prevented honest discussion of what's actually possible. Back in March, the debate should have been "This could go on for a while. What is going to be possible in the space schools have, what extra space is available, what online and broadcast stuff can fill the gaps?" That didn't really happen, because the powers that be decided that it would all be over by teatime anyway. So teachers and heads have been working themselves into madness trying to get social distancing to work with the rooms and furniture they have.
Finally, there's no point opening schools if parents aren't convinced of safety. The one mine go to was down to about 50 % attendance before closure, and the figures for schools that have reopened aren't great.
On WFH, our staff survey shows four-fifths want to carry on WFH for at least part of the week. One of the primary reasons why people want to go in to the office is social interaction with colleagues.
Does this count as data, or just anecdata?
I imagine, for a lot of people, a 2 day commuting week would be very desirable. The other 3 days you work from home
Trouble is, why would any company sustain all the expenses of an office which is so underused? They won't.
The more I think about it, the more I think core Central Business Districts, in the west, with big tall towers, are fecked. Bad news for a lot of American cities (not great for London)
London will reinvent; it always does. And a London reinventing with the available infrastructure intact and not bombed out could be ace. Two other thoughts;
1 London has kind of grown itself into a dead end. It's a city state that only works by sucking the life out of a large chunk of South East England. And a lot of the people you need to make the city work simply can't dream of paying their own way there.
2 If the future of London is as a national hub, a place where more people go once or twice a week, what are the social implications? Suppose the way that people work in London is early train from Smalltown, a day of face-to-face, a meal, a show and the last train home? I can see the attractions. But one of the things that makes big cities interesting is the sense of anonymity. WFH+ could send that through the roof...
Incidentally, that frequently describes my trips to Town.
2 hour train journey, a 4-6 hours work, drinks, dinner with some mates, sometimes a show. Sometimes a kip over to work again the next day. Sometimes back on the last train. It is great fun. Probably 6-8 days a month.
Selfishly (I have to admit), I AM looking forward to the decent hotels being sub £200 mid-week, though, because of less biz travel. Heck, they might be sub £100 for a while. I remember it being like that in 09/10...
Will be fascinating to see what happens to property prices. Long thought about a pied a terre in South Ken sort of area, but has become unaffordable in recent years.
Who gives a crap about London, perhaps they will do something sensible and stop it sucking the life out of the rest of the country, can only be good.
I'm in Edinburgh 5-6 times a year too - for work, and also because my closest friend (and also now my Godson) lives there. I dread to think how this is going to hit hotels etc there - already massive overcapacity outside of summer months/festival. Rarely pay over £100/night for a five star hotel now.... How low can it go before they convert them into residential flats?
Some people will end up going back to the office full time, but I reckon that WFH is a revolution that will never be rolled back. Many will only go into the office part time, or they will only congregate physically with other colleagues for occasional meetings held in hired rooms, or they'll be at home the whole time.
There are clearly advantages to having your employees drag themselves into the office full time, but there are also huge advantages lying in the opposite direction. I would be willing to bet that most staff prefer working at home as a matter of course to spending colossal sums of money commuting on horrible, barely functional cattle truck trains, a waste of thousands of (intensely stressful) hours every year. Then there are the costs to employers of maintaining suites of offices. And the premium they are probably going to be forced to pay in future if they want staff who have WFH jobs to choose from to commute instead.
Basically, if you have a choice of two similar jobs that both pay the same amount of cash, one of which allows you to work from home and the other of which requires you to slog in and out of London on trains for an hour-and-a-half in each direction every week day, then you'd be bloody mad not to pick the WFH option.
I think this will even itself out, and that many services will be required for at-homers.
This could be an even-further continuing renaissance of the pub lunch, or takeaway lunch,
I was speculating on that point myself a little earlier. Much of that economic activity to support the office workers isn't just going to evaporate - it'll simply move away from where the redundant offices are in the urban cores, out to where these people live.
If you're saving all this extra time not commuting then, unless you're in an occupation where you really do need to be glued to your computer/phone the whole time you're not on your break, then why not start early, take a two-hour lunch break to go shopping and/or down the pub, and then come back home after that to finish your allotted hours?
Much more flexible working ought to be another benefit of the WFH revolution - along with a much wider range of work now potentially available to disabled people who find it challenging to get around, too.
If many people are going to be WFH all or almost all of the time, why do they need to be in the UK at all? Why not somewhere sunnier, at least for the winter months? Somewhere with much lower property prices and maybe lower taxes, as long as it has a decent internet connection.
Quite. I'm looking at Thailand, or Greece, maybe Sri Lanka. I mean, why not?
I thought you guys didn't like people being able to just move to another country and start working there? Didn't we just have a referendum to stop that happening?
Its only people moving here that are the problem, not Britons taking over other countries...
And let's not forget that Jonny Foreigner coming over here is an immigrant, whereas Daily Mail reading twathead going over there is an Expat.
Well a Brit moving abroad couldn't be an immigrant from our perspective by definition. They'd be an emigrant. Which is such a rarely used word my spellcheck is underlining it red, but I'm pretty sure that's the right word.
To me there's a meaningful difference between emigrant and expat. I'd define an emigrant as someone who has moved to a country with an intention to stay there. I'd define an expat as someone who has moved temporarily to a country but intends to return home eventually.
I agree with your definition. However, those who move permanently to Spain or wherever love to call themselves expats when they are immigrants.
So many of them in Spain stay in English communities speaking little or no Spanish, not integrating into the community. And then sit there in bars whining about bloody foreigners back home who keep in their own community don't speak the language etc etc. It's English exceptionalism at it's worst
In Edinburgh primary school pupils will be in 4 days out of 3 weeks. 1,1,2 over the 3 weeks. Whole days. Fridays will be for the teachers to offer increased work from home support. We'll find out at the end of June our rotas.
I think the same style for secondary pupils as well but it is on a subject by subject basis for what that means for teaching.
That's rubbish. The dereliction of duty to kids by all governments in the UK has been disgraceful. The teachers need to be ordered back to work or face the dole queue.
It's not the teachers doing this you pillock it's the government. You cannot send kids back to school. So says the the government guidelines which are explicit and unambiguous about social distancing
It absolutely is the teachers. They were popping champagne corks at the NUT when the government announced it had capitulated. The social distancing guidelines are also a disaster and you'll find no defense of them from me, primarily it is the teachers and their unions not wanting to go to work.
As I said, they either report for work tomorrow or stick them in the dole queue.
Please explain how the teachers can get all the children back to full time education and comply with the government rules imposed upon them.
It's not the teachers. They can pop champagne or not, doesn't change that the government won't let them have classes bigger than 15.
Where did I say we can get them all into fulltime in person attendance? Even if they get them doing 50% attendance that would be a huge improvement to 4 days out of 4 weeks. That's one day a week, it's a joke. All teachers report to work or face the dole queue. Nothing more needs to be said.
On WFH, our staff survey shows four-fifths want to carry on WFH for at least part of the week. One of the primary reasons why people want to go in to the office is social interaction with colleagues.
Does this count as data, or just anecdata?
I imagine, for a lot of people, a 2 day commuting week would be very desirable. The other 3 days you work from home
Trouble is, why would any company sustain all the expenses of an office which is so underused? They won't.
The more I think about it, the more I think core Central Business Districts, in the west, with big tall towers, are fecked. Bad news for a lot of American cities (not great for London)
London will reinvent; it always does. And a London reinventing with the available infrastructure intact and not bombed out could be ace. Two other thoughts;
1 London has kind of grown itself into a dead end. It's a city state that only works by sucking the life out of a large chunk of South East England. And a lot of the people you need to make the city work simply can't dream of paying their own way there.
2 If the future of London is as a national hub, a place where more people go once or twice a week, what are the social implications? Suppose the way that people work in London is early train from Smalltown, a day of face-to-face, a meal, a show and the last train home? I can see the attractions. But one of the things that makes big cities interesting is the sense of anonymity. WFH+ could send that through the roof...
Incidentally, that frequently describes my trips to Town.
2 hour train journey, a 4-6 hours work, drinks, dinner with some mates, sometimes a show. Sometimes a kip over to work again the next day. Sometimes back on the last train. It is great fun. Probably 6-8 days a month.
Selfishly (I have to admit), I AM looking forward to the decent hotels being sub £200 mid-week, though, because of less biz travel. Heck, they might be sub £100 for a while. I remember it being like that in 09/10...
Will be fascinating to see what happens to property prices. Long thought about a pied a terre in South Ken sort of area, but has become unaffordable in recent years.
Who gives a crap about London, perhaps they will do something sensible and stop it sucking the life out of the rest of the country, can only be good.
I'm in Edinburgh 5-6 times a year too - for work, and also because my closest friend (and also now my Godson) lives there. I dread to think how this is going to hit hotels etc there - already massive overcapacity outside of summer months/festival. Rarely pay over £100/night for a five star hotel now.... How low can it go before they convert them into residential flats?
Edinburgh relied on festivals and tourism, however I am sure many will enjoy it being a bit quieter.
In Edinburgh primary school pupils will be in 4 days out of 3 weeks. 1,1,2 over the 3 weeks. Whole days. Fridays will be for the teachers to offer increased work from home support. We'll find out at the end of June our rotas.
I think the same style for secondary pupils as well but it is on a subject by subject basis for what that means for teaching.
That's rubbish. The dereliction of duty to kids by all governments in the UK has been disgraceful. The teachers need to be ordered back to work or face the dole queue.
It's not the teachers doing this you pillock it's the government. You cannot send kids back to school. So says the the government guidelines which are explicit and unambiguous about social distancing
It absolutely is the teachers. They were popping champagne corks at the NUT when the government announced it had capitulated. The social distancing guidelines are also a disaster and you'll find no defense of them from me, primarily it is the teachers and their unions not wanting to go to work.
As I said, they either report for work tomorrow or stick them in the dole queue.
Please explain how the teachers can get all the children back to full time education and comply with the government rules imposed upon them.
It's not the teachers. They can pop champagne or not, doesn't change that the government won't let them have classes bigger than 15.
And of course that puts the kibosh on it. Meanwhile, I am a teacher not in the profession. We saw doctors and nurses being tempted out of retirement. Where is the plea from Williamson? Of course I'd have no physical space to teach in cos no apparent thought has been given to that. They just find it easier to blame the Unions.
Second, by pushing wishful thinking, it's prevented honest discussion of what's actually possible. Back in March, the debate should have been "This could go on for a while. What is going to be possible in the space schools have, what extra space is available, what online and broadcast stuff can fill the gaps?" That didn't really happen, because the powers that be decided that it would all be over by teatime anyway. So teachers and heads have been working themselves into madness trying to get social distancing to work with the rooms and furniture they have.
Finally, there's no point opening schools if parents aren't convinced of safety. The one mine go to was down to about 50 % attendance before closure, and the figures for schools that have reopened aren't great.
It's irrelevant whether parents have confidence of safety or not. The government do not have confidence, they are telling the schools it is not safe hence the directives from government to schools that they cannot reopen with normal classes and practices. And until social distancing is withdrawn this will continue to be the case. Our kids are goi g to get part time schooling at best and this is a catastrophe.
The blame sits with the government. The government has instructed schools not to reopen with more than a half full classroom. The government has done nothing to tackle the lack of physical space crisis and looked to alternative solutions. That right wing pillocks (not you Stuart!) blame the teachers for the government directive isn't a surprise
Tribalism aside, can anyone really say, with hand on heart, that Boris Johnson is any good? If so, how?
He's good at winning elections, doncha know? Two London Mayoralties Brexit (arguably) Tory Leadership GE 2019
Cheating and chicanery for the most part. So what else can you tell us?
That he's only good at winning elections?
But not honestly, according to the rules. That is why the Conservatives are no longer trusted. They are cheats. Would you want to play cards with a Conservative?
Have the Liberal Democrats returned the pensioners money that Michael Brown stole and gave them yet I know that your persuaded the electoral commission that it was a legal donation, but that doesn’t mean the source of funds was acceptable. Until you repay it your party is beneath contempt.
Would you like to tell us the whole story, with all the details, please, Lord Charles?
And then, perhaps, to provide balance, you could provide is with a list of all the donations to the Conservative Party from the tax dodgers we have in our midst?
I’m not the son of an earl, so just a humble Charles will do.
I’m also not a member of the Tory Party and don’t have access to their donors list
But I replied to @nichomar comparing and contrasting the Michael Brown and Asil Nadir cases which I think are probably the closest
Schoolboy error there Charles. Elder sons of earls are viscounts; younger ones are Hons. Although elder ones could be called Lord Smith but not Lord Charles Smith. Younger sons of dukes or marquesses would be called Lord Charles Smith.
I think, @Charles , that someone is comparing you to a ventriloquist's dummy :-) .
In Edinburgh primary school pupils will be in 4 days out of 3 weeks. 1,1,2 over the 3 weeks. Whole days. Fridays will be for the teachers to offer increased work from home support. We'll find out at the end of June our rotas.
I think the same style for secondary pupils as well but it is on a subject by subject basis for what that means for teaching.
That's rubbish. The dereliction of duty to kids by all governments in the UK has been disgraceful. The teachers need to be ordered back to work or face the dole queue.
It's not the teachers doing this you pillock it's the government. You cannot send kids back to school. So says the the government guidelines which are explicit and unambiguous about social distancing
It absolutely is the teachers. They were popping champagne corks at the NUT when the government announced it had capitulated. The social distancing guidelines are also a disaster and you'll find no defense of them from me, primarily it is the teachers and their unions not wanting to go to work.
As I said, they either report for work tomorrow or stick them in the dole queue.
Please explain how the teachers can get all the children back to full time education and comply with the government rules imposed upon them.
It's not the teachers. They can pop champagne or not, doesn't change that the government won't let them have classes bigger than 15.
Where did I say we can get them all into fulltime in person attendance? Even if they get them doing 50% attendance that would be a huge improvement to 4 days out of 4 weeks. That's one day a week, it's a joke. All teachers report to work or face the dole queue. Nothing more needs to be said.
They are at work. You are literally clueless. We need double the number of teachers to cope with the government "half sized classes" edict and you want to sack them for complying.
An utter pillock playing politics with my kids education. Congratulations.
Tribalism aside, can anyone really say, with hand on heart, that Boris Johnson is any good? If so, how?
He's good at winning elections, doncha know? Two London Mayoralties Brexit (arguably) Tory Leadership GE 2019
Cheating and chicanery for the most part. So what else can you tell us?
That he's only good at winning elections?
But not honestly, according to the rules. That is why the Conservatives are no longer trusted. They are cheats. Would you want to play cards with a Conservative?
Have the Liberal Democrats returned the pensioners money that Michael Brown stole and gave them yet I know that your persuaded the electoral commission that it was a legal donation, but that doesn’t mean the source of funds was acceptable. Until you repay it your party is beneath contempt.
Would you like to tell us the whole story, with all the details, please, Lord Charles?
And then, perhaps, to provide balance, you could provide is with a list of all the donations to the Conservative Party from the tax dodgers we have in our midst?
I’m not the son of an earl, so just a humble Charles will do.
I’m also not a member of the Tory Party and don’t have access to their donors list
But I replied to @nichomar comparing and contrasting the Michael Brown and Asil Nadir cases which I think are probably the closest
Schoolboy error there Charles. Elder sons of earls are viscounts; younger ones are Hons. Although elder ones could be called Lord Smith but not Lord Charles Smith. Younger sons of dukes or marquesses would be called Lord Charles Smith.
Most people I know don’t use the honorific title that much.
But I was referring to the difference between Lord Alfred Tennyson and Alfred, Lord Tennyson
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You said for the poster not to call you Lord Charles because you were not the son of an earl.
But the son of an earl wouldn't be called Lord Charles.
That's all.
Verbally he would
Hell, I was called “Mr Charles” when I used to spend the night in the flat above the shop
On WFH culture... UK housing stock is not setup for WFH. Not in any way.
I have done it no problem for almost 20 years. With fast broadband it is no issue, mind you I have plenty of space. Imagine if you were stuck in a small flat it might not be as pleasant.
It’s not the broadband I’m worried about. I’m talking about space really. Even 3 bedroom houses built within the last 30 years (hundreds of thousands of them) you’d struggle with.
Yes can imagine if you have young family it would be an issue.
At what point does the sacked liar of an education Secretary and his boss the sacked liar of a PM wake up to reality. Any social distancing means kids cannot go back to school. Part time schooling means split the class on half. One half in Monday Tuesday. Wednesday for cleaning and online lesson setting / marking. Other half Thursday/Friday. I know Max thinks a teacher can do physical and online teaching simultaneously but they can't. Part time schooling is a disaster for their education their social development and for the million plus vulnerable kids who need school for hot meals safety and stability.
We built nightingale hospitals quickly. We need nightingale schools in time for September. For some schools that may be portacabins in the playground. Others could combine, move into community centres and vacant offices and anywhere space can be found. It will be disruptive, but less so than the alternative.
O/T This is a fact which probably isn't popular with BLM: in recent years life expectancy for black Americans has continued rising, while life expectancy for white Americans has gone down.
Though still 4 years shorter for black males than white. Hispanics do better than both.
Partly it is improvements in Black Americans health, but the drug and suicide epidemic in white male Americans is dropping their life expectancy for the last 3 years or so.
It's pretty ignorant to say that bumping elbows is okay because, well, you know there isn't a lot of virus around. That's how pandemics take hold. People behaving like dumbasses.
This a respiratory borne virus which also transmits via surfaces and skin contact. We have to suck up the fact that until there's a vaccine or cure we can't go back to normal.
That means a minimum of 2 metres and everyone should be wearing a face mask indoors when with others. My friends in South Africa aren't allowed to go out their door without having one on, not even to walk the dogs.
It's tough. Wave to say hello or put a bit of elegance into it by making the traditional Wai greeting. But don't touch. Not even with your elbow.
Comments
Its MUCH easier for the latter, than the former. Can't imagine working on a change project/programme without being immersed in that business...
The petty rivalries, sense of hierarchy, 'I won't let him get such and such so cheaply, so I'll bid again' syndrome, is all subverted.
As you say, though, that won't necessarily be the case when it IS possible to go back to bidding in person.
Houses and flats have been built for the old way of doing things. An office space can be incorporated into designs going forward
First (and I know I go on about this a lot) the UK government hasn't done well at reducing the amount of virus in society. France is back to business as usual in a week's time, because they've had fewer deaths and infections recently. Our government has been rubbish, and I suspect it's because they are led by populists who won't do anything to upset the public. So our lockdown has always been half-hearted, less effective, so it has to drag on for longer.
Second, by pushing wishful thinking, it's prevented honest discussion of what's actually possible. Back in March, the debate should have been "This could go on for a while. What is going to be possible in the space schools have, what extra space is available, what online and broadcast stuff can fill the gaps?" That didn't really happen, because the powers that be decided that it would all be over by teatime anyway. So teachers and heads have been working themselves into madness trying to get social distancing to work with the rooms and furniture they have.
Finally, there's no point opening schools if parents aren't convinced of safety. The one mine go to was down to about 50 % attendance before closure, and the figures for schools that have reopened aren't great.
Meanwhile, I am a teacher not in the profession. We saw doctors and nurses being tempted out of retirement. Where is the plea from Williamson?
Of course I'd have no physical space to teach in cos no apparent thought has been given to that.
They just find it easier to blame the Unions.
The blame sits with the government. The government has instructed schools not to reopen with more than a half full classroom. The government has done nothing to tackle the lack of physical space crisis and looked to alternative solutions. That right wing pillocks (not you Stuart!) blame the teachers for the government directive isn't a surprise
An utter pillock playing politics with my kids education. Congratulations.
Hell, I was called “Mr Charles” when I used to spend the night in the flat above the shop
We built nightingale hospitals quickly. We need nightingale schools in time for September. For some schools that may be portacabins in the playground. Others could combine, move into community centres and vacant offices and anywhere space can be found. It will be disruptive, but less so than the alternative.
Partly it is improvements in Black Americans health, but the drug and suicide epidemic in white male Americans is dropping their life expectancy for the last 3 years or so.
This a respiratory borne virus which also transmits via surfaces and skin contact. We have to suck up the fact that until there's a vaccine or cure we can't go back to normal.
That means a minimum of 2 metres and everyone should be wearing a face mask indoors when with others. My friends in South Africa aren't allowed to go out their door without having one on, not even to walk the dogs.
It's tough. Wave to say hello or put a bit of elegance into it by making the traditional Wai greeting. But don't touch. Not even with your elbow.