quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Newsnight: cases in Wales twice as high as before their circuit-breaker lockdown. What's going on there?
A circuit breaker only does something useful if you use the time to fix the underlying problem in that fortnight. I see little evidence of that happening anywhere. Hence the England figures following the same course.
England changed the Tiers and got a vaccine approved during our lockdown. That's two something's, though the latter will take a while for rollout the former is having an impact.
Is anywhere in Tier 3 still seeing rising case numbers?
BBC reports this morning that about 250 LA areas have rising cases and about 50 falling
Thanks - doesn't that roughly correspond to the proportion in Tier 2 vs the proportion in T3?
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
I've been struck recently by the way that Loyal Conservatives here (no names, no packdrill) muse on a fairly rapid (less than 10 years) step back to EEA.
This particular cat seems especially opposed to a hard border (or visa versa).
The article contains an obvious mistake, since it says that the paperwork to return to the UK will be the same, yet the paperwork is currently the passport. My understanding is that a separate vets' certificate will be required to confirm that the worming treatment has been done.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
I've been struck recently by the way that Loyal Conservatives here (no names, no packdrill) muse on a fairly rapid (less than 10 years) step back to EEA.
Makes one wonder why we're bothering, really.
Not going to happen. It is delusional to suggest that.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
Ah you mean all those people that dont get paid if they don't work or who's companys have strict policies about if you have more than x days off in six months you get hr on your back with a disciplinary.
If somebody comes in with a streaming cold or hacking cough, that should be evidence enough for an employer to say "You - home!". It makes no sense to then have half their staff off with it over the next couple of weeks. A Zoom call in for sickness could become the new normal.
Those who don't get paid if they don't work is part of the reason Covid is running riot. There's plenty of anecdotal evidence of doctors telling people with a positive test that they have to self-isolate, but those people going straight back to work. That is much tougher to address. You can understand them doing it, coupled with a (now probably out of date) stat of 25% of the population having less than £100 savings. An easier state payment system for those diagnosed has been one of the answers suggested a good while back. But some of those impacted still won't play ball.
It doesn't matter if your boss thinks you aren't fit to work for most people though. I know my place has a strict policy. Doesnt matter if you are really ill or they think you are skiving. You are on hr review with more than a very low number of days in a 6 month period. I had real flu back in january and was off for 5 days as could hardly get to the kitchen let alone work. Came back to find I am now under hr review and any further periods of illness in the next 6 months puts my job in jeapordy. Up to then I had averaged about 2 days ill a year.
Don't want people to come in when ill then fine. If however you don't want them in when ill don't punish them for taking time to recover
As I suggested, a Zoom call should perhaps now be a starting point for HR.
A zoom call would do what ? You seem to be failing to get the point. They don't care if you are really ill or skiving. They merely care you are taking time off work. Your past record doesn't count . You have taken x days off in the last 6 months take another 1 in the next 6 months you will be out.
Newsnight: cases in Wales twice as high as before their circuit-breaker lockdown. What's going on there?
A circuit breaker only does something useful if you use the time to fix the underlying problem in that fortnight. I see little evidence of that happening anywhere. Hence the England figures following the same course.
England changed the Tiers and got a vaccine approved during our lockdown. That's two something's, though the latter will take a while for rollout the former is having an impact.
Is anywhere in Tier 3 still seeing rising case numbers?
Yes, @Malmesbury's daily chart shows that every region now has R above 1.
I've not seen his chart for today. Last I saw it there was a mix of above and below 1 so I'm surprised and disappointed, I thought Tier 3 regions were below it.
I think London R is up to 2. We are heading for 500 cases per 100,000/7 days by the weekend.
R 2 is not good, no wonder its gone to Tier 3 then. Probably not a surprise seeing images of people shopping in London for Christmas - I've solely shopped with Amazon (and other online retailers) this year.
Not sure the whole country should be locked down because one city is seeing cases surge prior to being put into Tier 3.
But we will be up to 60,000 cases a day UK by 28 Dec. This is why Boris will announce the open ended lockdown from 28 Dec. He will announce it early next week.
If you're going to have a lockdown then bloody well do it before New Year's Eve.
I'm sure a lot of people are going to want to party to see the back of 2020 . . . but that's the problem.
Christmas may not have been cancelled, but if you're going to do a lockdown then ensure that Hogmanay is.
Yes Boris has said that the 23 to 27 Dec relaxation will stay so no lockdown before then.
But the government knows what is coming and they will be planning the lockdown from 28 Dec. In this case just for once Drakeford is ahead of the game.
They know we need time for the vaccinations so needs to be in place until 28 Feb minimum. Just like they knew on 23 March 2020 it would be till June minimum. But they will say 'three weeks then a review'.
January is a f***ing s**t month at the best of times. I'm tempted to say just cancel January and concentrate on rolling out the vaccine and squishing the virus through January . . .
. . . but then with an ambition to take everywhere down to no higher than Tier 2 at the most by the second week of February (Valentine's Day). If restaurants can plan for and take bookings for Valentine's as a point just after reopening then that could be good business - and it doesn't require household mixing.
I don’t know but given that (a) it’s a standardised fill/finish process and (b) the consequences (and cost) of a short vaccine dose are great than a little wastage I would assume so
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
I've been struck recently by the way that Loyal Conservatives here (no names, no packdrill) muse on a fairly rapid (less than 10 years) step back to EEA.
Makes one wonder why we're bothering, really.
Not going to happen. It is delusional to suggest that.
So you knew 10 years ago what would happen in 2020?
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
Optimist! We’ve got at least a decade more of Brexit arguments IMHO
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
I've been struck recently by the way that Loyal Conservatives here (no names, no packdrill) muse on a fairly rapid (less than 10 years) step back to EEA.
Makes one wonder why we're bothering, really.
Not going to happen. It is delusional to suggest that.
So you knew 10 years ago what would happen in 2020?
Not at all - I couldn't tell you where we'll be in 2030, but where we won't be is back where we were in 2010.
People always think we're going to be refighting the battles of the recent past rather than looking to the (as yet unforeseen) battles of the near future.
We've left the EU and like the tale of humpty dumpty it won't be getting put back together again. We're going to evolve down a different path.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
Optimist! We’ve got at least a decade more of Brexit arguments IMHO
Yes but we'll be having new arguments, not the old ones. That is something at least.
The suggestion thaat the Sputnik vaccine may actually work is slightly interesting, though it doesn't seem to be holding the pandemic down much in Russia yet.
Surely they aren't that much more advanced in their mass vaccination campaign to be able to state that with confidence though? Do we have an idea of how many folk they have jabbed with it?
We are effectively in a Cold War with the Russians, where truth is replaced by bias. But surely we have to admit, if the KGB of any country rounds up its best in a field scientists and tells them their family will live in exile in the artic circle if a world beating vaccine is not produced, it’s going to yield some sort of result?
The British Retail Consortium (BRC) and the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) warn they face "major challenges" in building up stock for Christmas and the end of the transition period on December 31.
In a joint letter to the chairs of the Commons Transport Select Committee and the Commons International Trade Committee, they wrote that some shipping costs have more than doubled compared with last year.
One food manufacturer has suffered lost sales worth more than £1 million due to a shortage during the crucial festive period, the letter stated.
The BRC and FDF want the committees to hold an inquiry into the chaos at ports and the functioning of the shipping market.
Yep. Four years of debt panic from GOP. See Paul Krugman's many articles on their debt hypocrisy.
The Trump administration was running a near $1 trillion deficit at the top of the economic cycle before Covid struck and Senate Republicans didn't give two shits. They are the worst.
Yep. Four years of debt panic from GOP. See Paul Krugman's many articles on their debt hypocrisy.
The Trump administration was running a near $1 trillion deficit at the top of the economic cycle before Covid struck and Senate Republicans didn't give two shits. They are the worst.
Indeed.
Though on the + side, it seems a more normal politics is being reestablished.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
To give another example, last year for a while I was working Mon/Fri at home and Tue-Thu on client site. On Monday I'm capable of working, just about, but I have a temperature, and I'm clearly infectious with something.
So it makes sense to me not to travel across the country and spread the infection on the client site, and work that week from home. I also didn't fancy a couple of days in a hotel if I became more sick. But the issue ends up being discussed all day, by multiple people, and I only finally receive permission to work from home ten minutes before departure from Edinburgh Waverley when I've already dragged myself into town.
Why was that necessary?
Only because the default assumption is that anyone who calls in sick is a malingerer. And that's why people with infections will drag themselves into work.
I used to work for a sweet-natured Italian statistician in the days when people had personal secretaries. He did an analysis to show that his secretary was ill on Mondays only with a statistical signifiance of 98%. He showed it to her gently as a "curiosity", and the pattern stopped.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
I don’t know but given that (a) it’s a standardised fill/finish process and (b) the consequences (and cost) of a short vaccine dose are great than a little wastage I would assume so
I was thinking about whether we were using the extra dose rather than whether it’s there.
Yep. Four years of debt panic from GOP. See Paul Krugman's many articles on their debt hypocrisy.
The Trump administration was running a near $1 trillion deficit at the top of the economic cycle before Covid struck and Senate Republicans didn't give two shits. They are the worst.
The GOP Senators and Reps at least have the defence of a venal love of power. The average GOP ramper on here who shoves their fingers in their ears whenever Trump's/Bush's/Reagan's deficit ballooning is raised has no excuse.
Making out as if that's some sort of relevation, when it's been obvious from the data, PHW have been fairly open about it, and the 11,000 number was in their official statement yesterday. Although it is indeed staggering that they would allow "planned maintenance" to distort the data in this way at the height of a pandemic.
The work rate of Liz Truss is phenomenal. Not only has she grandfathered (or bettered) all significant UK trade deals it held via the EU in 11 months, except Turkey, but she's also now advancing a US-UK mini-deal: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55341970
On top of that, don't forget she's also Minister for Women and Equalities.
She gave a common sense decision to the consultation on reform of the Gender Recognition Act in September and, today, she's hit out at identity politics and signalled a pivot away from “fashionable” race, sexuality and gender issues to poverty and geographical disparities - including rebasing it in the north:
I have been seriously considering her odds as next Prime Minister this morning. After reviewing the market, I think the 100/1 with William Hill is stonking value. I've hoovered up as much as I can.
The work rate of Liz Truss is phenomenal. Not only has she grandfathered (or bettered) all significant UK trade deals it held via the EU in 11 months, except Turkey, but she's also now advancing a US-UK mini-deal: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55341970
On top of that, don't forget she's also Minister for Women and Equalities.
She gave a common sense decision to the consultation on reform of the Gender Recognition Act in September and, today, she's hit out at identity politics and signalled a pivot away from “fashionable” race, sexuality and gender issues to poverty and geographical disparities - including rebasing it in the north:
I have been seriously considering her odds as next Prime Minister this morning. After reviewing the market, I think the 100/1 with William Hill is stonking value. I've hoovered up as much as I can.
DYOR.
could be an excellent trading bet. i suspect in the end she'll angle for being someone's coe, but might run to help get her name in the frame.
Utter clown show. Tories used to be party of business. Seems the party is full now of people who have no idea whatsoever how business works.
That law against an extension of the transition period, is it specifically against an extension under the withdrawal agreement, or more general to anything that looks like it?
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
To give another example, last year for a while I was working Mon/Fri at home and Tue-Thu on client site. On Monday I'm capable of working, just about, but I have a temperature, and I'm clearly infectious with something.
So it makes sense to me not to travel across the country and spread the infection on the client site, and work that week from home. I also didn't fancy a couple of days in a hotel if I became more sick. But the issue ends up being discussed all day, by multiple people, and I only finally receive permission to work from home ten minutes before departure from Edinburgh Waverley when I've already dragged myself into town.
Why was that necessary?
Only because the default assumption is that anyone who calls in sick is a malingerer. And that's why people with infections will drag themselves into work.
I used to work for a sweet-natured Italian statistician in the days when people had personal secretaries. He did an analysis to show that his secretary was ill on Mondays only with a statistical signifiance of 98%. He showed it to her gently as a "curiosity", and the pattern stopped.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
There’s really no excuse for treating employees badly. If you’re a small business, then long term sick cases can be very difficult, but that doesn’t excuse treating them with contempt.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
First time I was off sick in my current job, my line manager was also new in the organisation. I went back in after 2-3 days (forget, it was a virus, flu-like in some ways with temperature, but not that severe) and we went through the return to work form together - questions like 'how would you avoid having this time away from work again'. Dunno, never go anywhere, wear a mask all the time? It was such a pain - 2or 3 sides of A4 - and clearly so pointless that next time I was sick I informed her again, but when I went back and asked about the form she said we'd just deal with sickness between us from now on, so there were no forms. So, my employer's personnel records will show I've had one sickness absence in 6 years. It's sensible in many ways, as I'm only off sick for random bugs for a few days at a time once or twice a year* and just catch up with the work when back, so how much I'm absent is pretty irrelevant. Clearly if I had a longer term illness we'd have to do the forms and inform HR. But the pointless pain of a ridiculous form means that HR no longer have any information on absence in - I assume - a whole team of 10 people or so and probable several other teams.
*I've also had time off when my wife and I have had miscarriages. I don't know what the official employer policy in those circumstances is, but I had a week the first time, which was enough for me to get myself back together and be productive when I came back - my workload didn't change and I did longer hours over the next few weeks t catch up, which suited me fine. Shorter times on the other occasions, as I didn't need as long. For another family member in the same situation, her husband was expected back at work the next day (even though he was in a job where others could take over his work). He described himself as a zombie for the next few weeks and left the employer as soon as he was able to find another position.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
To give another example, last year for a while I was working Mon/Fri at home and Tue-Thu on client site. On Monday I'm capable of working, just about, but I have a temperature, and I'm clearly infectious with something.
So it makes sense to me not to travel across the country and spread the infection on the client site, and work that week from home. I also didn't fancy a couple of days in a hotel if I became more sick. But the issue ends up being discussed all day, by multiple people, and I only finally receive permission to work from home ten minutes before departure from Edinburgh Waverley when I've already dragged myself into town.
Why was that necessary?
Only because the default assumption is that anyone who calls in sick is a malingerer. And that's why people with infections will drag themselves into work.
I used to work for a sweet-natured Italian statistician in the days when people had personal secretaries. He did an analysis to show that his secretary was ill on Mondays only with a statistical signifiance of 98%. He showed it to her gently as a "curiosity", and the pattern stopped.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
There’s really no excuse for treating employees badly. If you’re a small business, then long term sick cases can be very difficult, but that doesn’t excuse treating them with contempt.
Not quite the same, but long years ago when I ran a fairly large pharmacy, with quite a decent cosmetic business we took on a junior who after about a year got married and a couple of months later told us she wanted the then new maternity leave. Older female staff a bit sniffy...... who was going to look after the baby etc. but that was the law, so OK. She came back in due time, then two months later announced that she'd be off on maternity leave again soon. And shortly after she came back from that she'd fallen again!
There's other articles breaking down the leadership favourability questions (summary, Sturgeon is untouchable unless you are a moron, alas the SNP is full of morons)
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
There's other articles breaking down the leadership favourability questions (summary, Sturgeon is untouchable unless you are a moron, alas the SNP is full of morons)
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
LOL
Ah, the disdainful LOL of the Remainer.
Some of us are going to knuckle down to make sure that new path is a reality. Underpinned by the knowledge that the democratic process has been greatly enhanced: both by getting out from under an EU that has a deep distrust of democracy - because those pesky voters use it to thwart their Project - and proving that the voters DO have a voice to which politicans must listen.
Not my problem that such things mean so little to you.
Excellent article, Alistair, and thanks for the name check.
If I had backed Trump with Betfair, I wouldn't hope for the result to be overturned or the market reopened. That would be too ambitious. I would however ask for a refund of all bets placed between 7th November, by which time the Networks had unanimously projected the Electoral Votes in favour of Biden, and the 14th December when Betfair rather arbitrarily decided to settle the market on the basis of actual ECVs.
Didn’t you get the brief from Philip ? We no longer have to face the arguments which have torn us asunder....
Brexit not Sindy.
We will move on from arguments about Europe primarily to other arguments and Sindyref II is going to be up there near the top.
I for one will be cheering on from the sidelines the Yes campaign in the inevitable second Sindyref. Only once Scotland becomes a sovereign country can and will it start to move on from every issue being a battle with London.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
LOL
Ah, the disdainful LOL of the Remainer.
Some of us are going to knuckle down to make sure that new path is a reality. Underpinned by the knowledge that the democratic process has been greatly enhanced: both by getting out from under an EU that has a deep distrust of democracy - because those pesky voters use it to thwart their Project - and proving that the voters DO have a voice to which politicans must listen.
Not my problem that such things mean so little to you.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
To give another example, last year for a while I was working Mon/Fri at home and Tue-Thu on client site. On Monday I'm capable of working, just about, but I have a temperature, and I'm clearly infectious with something.
So it makes sense to me not to travel across the country and spread the infection on the client site, and work that week from home. I also didn't fancy a couple of days in a hotel if I became more sick. But the issue ends up being discussed all day, by multiple people, and I only finally receive permission to work from home ten minutes before departure from Edinburgh Waverley when I've already dragged myself into town.
Why was that necessary?
Only because the default assumption is that anyone who calls in sick is a malingerer. And that's why people with infections will drag themselves into work.
I used to work for a sweet-natured Italian statistician in the days when people had personal secretaries. He did an analysis to show that his secretary was ill on Mondays only with a statistical signifiance of 98%. He showed it to her gently as a "curiosity", and the pattern stopped.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
There’s really no excuse for treating employees badly. If you’re a small business, then long term sick cases can be very difficult, but that doesn’t excuse treating them with contempt.
Not quite the same, but long years ago when I ran a fairly large pharmacy, with quite a decent cosmetic business we took on a junior who after about a year got married and a couple of months later told us she wanted the then new maternity leave. Older female staff a bit sniffy...... who was going to look after the baby etc. but that was the law, so OK. She came back in due time, then two months later announced that she'd be off on maternity leave again soon. And shortly after she came back from that she'd fallen again!
Yep, ambiguity is a real issue in politics betting, and especially if you're hedging across different bookies. You can end up losing on your core position AND your hedge if you're not careful. What we used to call "basic risk" in trader parlance.
Eg, with the $markets "Noel Edmonds" market on Brexit. I have long had a confidence close to certainty that we will never be No Dealing, so when at the height of the hype last week No Deal went odds on favourite at 1.84, it appeared on the face of it a slam dunk betting opportunity - lay it for loads.
But, ooo what's this, the Small Print. If there's a Deal teed up but it doesn't get signed off by 31 Dec, so there's a short extension to approve and implement, say, whatever that might be called, it's into a grey area for the bet and quite likely it's a loser. So I passed. Didn't do it.
Excellent article, Alistair, and thanks for the name check.
If I had backed Trump with Betfair, I wouldn't hope for the result to be overturned or the market reopened. That would be too ambitious. I would however ask for a refund of all bets placed between 7th November, by which time the Networks had unanimously projected the Electoral Votes in favour of Biden, and the 14th December when Betfair rather arbitrarily decided to settle the market on the basis of actual ECVs.
I think I'd have a case.
Except the terms were the "official" projections and those were only settled on the 14th. Until the 14th the official projections could change, on the 14th the official projections were 'locked' and finalised.
There's nothing arbitrary about that. I know that you disagree but the simple matter of law is that there was nothing legally official about the networks 'declaration' on the 7th November. The official declaration was 14 December.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Though healthcare is already devolved to Scotland isn't it?
If it was a case of Scotland 400 vs England 900 you might have a point but it isn't.
Plus of course by being a part of the UK it has to be noteworthy that Scotland is at the front of the queue for vaccinations - had an independent Scotland within the EU joined the EU scheme instead then they'd be waiting months while England rolled out its vaccine.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Australia:29
It's a pity we couldn't have had an Australian style pandemic repsonse instead of an Australian style every-fucking-thing else.
Excellent article, Alistair, and thanks for the name check.
If I had backed Trump with Betfair, I wouldn't hope for the result to be overturned or the market reopened. That would be too ambitious. I would however ask for a refund of all bets placed between 7th November, by which time the Networks had unanimously projected the Electoral Votes in favour of Biden, and the 14th December when Betfair rather arbitrarily decided to settle the market on the basis of actual ECVs.
I think I'd have a case.
Except the terms were the "official" projections and those were only settled on the 14th. Until the 14th the official projections could change, on the 14th the official projections were 'locked' and finalised.
There's nothing arbitrary about that. I know that you disagree but the simple matter of law is that there was nothing legally official about the networks 'declaration' on the 7th November. The official declaration was 14 December.
You seem to have confused the word projection with confirmation.
From 7th November there were projections that Biden had won. On 14th December when the Electoral Votes were actually cast that projection was confirmed.
BetVictor didn't pay out to 14th December but their market was suspended from the 4th onwards, Betfair should have done the same and that wording could possibly cost them an awful lot of money (and it should do on duty of care reasons alone).
But it's not worth arguing over as we are all trying to remember what the Betfair market actually said. The issue is that Betfair royally and completely and utterly screwed up here and have cost some people who didn't know better (so shouldn't have been betting in the first place) a lot of money.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
LOL
Ah, the disdainful LOL of the Remainer.
Some of us are going to knuckle down to make sure that new path is a reality. Underpinned by the knowledge that the democratic process has been greatly enhanced: both by getting out from under an EU that has a deep distrust of democracy - because those pesky voters use it to thwart their Project - and proving that the voters DO have a voice to which politicans must listen.
Not my problem that such things mean so little to you.
I don’t remember the EU saying that they’d block a referendum even if a winning party had it in its manifesto, so they can’t be THAT distrustful of democracy.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Though healthcare is already devolved to Scotland isn't it?
If it was a case of Scotland 400 vs England 900 you might have a point but it isn't.
Plus of course by being a part of the UK it has to be noteworthy that Scotland is at the front of the queue for vaccinations - had an independent Scotland within the EU joined the EU scheme instead then they'd be waiting months while England rolled out its vaccine.
Given the current relative rates in the graph frequently posted here, which are about 2/3 England, and only barely going up at present, it may not be so surprising. Also the general steadiness of that curve and the relative lack of chopping and changing policy. Very different feel here from what it is obviously like in Wales from what our PB colleagues say.
There is also Brexit. Which has, in a sense, not happened yet.
Excellent article, Alistair, and thanks for the name check.
If I had backed Trump with Betfair, I wouldn't hope for the result to be overturned or the market reopened. That would be too ambitious. I would however ask for a refund of all bets placed between 7th November, by which time the Networks had unanimously projected the Electoral Votes in favour of Biden, and the 14th December when Betfair rather arbitrarily decided to settle the market on the basis of actual ECVs.
I think I'd have a case.
Except the terms were the "official" projections and those were only settled on the 14th. Until the 14th the official projections could change, on the 14th the official projections were 'locked' and finalised.
There's nothing arbitrary about that. I know that you disagree but the simple matter of law is that there was nothing legally official about the networks 'declaration' on the 7th November. The official declaration was 14 December.
You seem to have confused the word projection with confirmation.
From 7th November there were projections that Biden had won. On 14th December when the Electoral Votes were actually cast that projection was confirmed.
BetVictor didn't pay out to 14th December but their market was suspended from the 4th onwards, Betfair should have done the same and that wording could possibly cost them an awful lot of money (and it should do on duty of care reasons alone).
I'm not confused, you're confused. Projections can change. It has happened before.
In Florida 2000 with the same Terms and Conditions as 2020 the "projection" initially was that Gore won. In the end Bush won it. Did Betfair pay out on Gore as a winner because that was the first projection? Of course not.
Or go further back and there was a newspaper that famously projected that Dewey beat Truman. Did that mean that bookies around with the same Ts and Cs then would have paid out on Dewey? Of course not.
The terms do say projection but they don't say which projection they go off. Is it the first projection? Or the final projection? In the past they have paid on the final projection not the first projection quite rightly and waiting for the official results waits to see if the projection changes.
quite tenuous... I prefer the analysis of 1. Blair's Iraq War - demolishing trust in politicians 2. Accession of the Eastern European nations to the EU will few limits on numbers (which I was generally in favour of BTW) 3. A recession in 2009 that saw UK public services and incomes squeezed to the limits 4. A lacklustre Remain campaign dominated by the Conservatice modernising wing which was not helped by piss poor Labour support.... maybe then I would buy into the Arab Spring having a part......(assisted by N Farage et al...)
no mention of Red Buses from me...
The most interesting part of it is the unstated assumption that Brexit isn't a positive development.
Some things don't need to be said.
When all is said and done I think it is, Brexit is going about as well as could have been hoped for. We have a trade deal about to be signed with Europe and we've rolled over trade deals with all our other major partners too - the only way is up from here.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
LOL
Ah, the disdainful LOL of the Remainer.
Some of us are going to knuckle down to make sure that new path is a reality. Underpinned by the knowledge that the democratic process has been greatly enhanced: both by getting out from under an EU that has a deep distrust of democracy - because those pesky voters use it to thwart their Project - and proving that the voters DO have a voice to which politicans must listen.
Not my problem that such things mean so little to you.
Not my problem that you appear to believe you can read minds, and consistently demonstrate you can't.
The LOL was at the notion that somehow all political argument over this would cease.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Though healthcare is already devolved to Scotland isn't it?
If it was a case of Scotland 400 vs England 900 you might have a point but it isn't.
Plus of course by being a part of the UK it has to be noteworthy that Scotland is at the front of the queue for vaccinations - had an independent Scotland within the EU joined the EU scheme instead then they'd be waiting months while England rolled out its vaccine.
Healthcare is devolved, but most of the effective action to control spread of the virus has involved massive borrowing to fund furlough for lockdown - the devolved governments have been dependent on Westminster for that.
The relevant comparison isn't between Scotland and England, it's between Scotland as-is and Scotland-as-might-have-been as represented by a nearby independent country with a similar population.
I've two thoughts on this - first, Covid has crowded out the other influenza viruses and will become the dominant virus for the next couple of decades.
Second, even the most basic public health precautions such as mask wearing, social distancing and the "fogging" of transport carriages have reduced the transmission of other viruses so as we fight Covid we fight all the others as well including the cold virus so I'm not surprised cases of other viruses are well down.
To be honest, some of the measures we have introduced to fight Covid such as mask wearing on public transport and the routine disinfecting of carriages seem sensible measures to continue even once Covid has finally been suppressed by (hopefully) mass vaccination.
Those who blether on about the economics might like to consider the notion the cost of keeping people healthier is a more productive economy with fewer people taking days sick.
I also hope that Covid sees the end of those absolute arseholes who come into work with contagious bugs, because they have some weird notion that the world can't possibly function without them.
Stay home. Get better.
That's not the only reason people do it of course. Plenty of places might say they want you to do that in such a situation, and even think they mean it, but react very differently if people actually do take 'too much' time off with bugs.
I've had to go through an excruciating, and stressful, "health assessment" due to breaching a threshold for number of sick absence days.
So, yes, I have then gone into the office dosed up on day nurse.
At least I'm now in a position in most circumstances to simply work from home instead. But that wasn't the case before.
To give another example, last year for a while I was working Mon/Fri at home and Tue-Thu on client site. On Monday I'm capable of working, just about, but I have a temperature, and I'm clearly infectious with something.
So it makes sense to me not to travel across the country and spread the infection on the client site, and work that week from home. I also didn't fancy a couple of days in a hotel if I became more sick. But the issue ends up being discussed all day, by multiple people, and I only finally receive permission to work from home ten minutes before departure from Edinburgh Waverley when I've already dragged myself into town.
Why was that necessary?
Only because the default assumption is that anyone who calls in sick is a malingerer. And that's why people with infections will drag themselves into work.
I used to work for a sweet-natured Italian statistician in the days when people had personal secretaries. He did an analysis to show that his secretary was ill on Mondays only with a statistical signifiance of 98%. He showed it to her gently as a "curiosity", and the pattern stopped.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
There’s really no excuse for treating employees badly. If you’re a small business, then long term sick cases can be very difficult, but that doesn’t excuse treating them with contempt.
Not quite the same, but long years ago when I ran a fairly large pharmacy, with quite a decent cosmetic business we took on a junior who after about a year got married and a couple of months later told us she wanted the then new maternity leave. Older female staff a bit sniffy...... who was going to look after the baby etc. but that was the law, so OK. She came back in due time, then two months later announced that she'd be off on maternity leave again soon. And shortly after she came back from that she'd fallen again!
Did you show her where the contraceptives were?
Her 'line manager' senior cosmetic assistant, a woman with two late-teenage daughter apparently told her one or two things!
@OldKingCole I can't even imagine a world without maternity leave. Mad.
I can recall a world where women talked of having to leave their jobs because they'd married. Mother-in-law for one. My mother ran her own pharmacy so the issue didn't arise!
History of controversy and politically connected are likely highly subjective categorisations.
As is no prior experience.
99% of PPE was imported previously whereas now 70% is manufactured in the UK so of course many would not have prior experience of manufacturing PPE. Doesn't mean they don't have transferable prior experience in something different that enables them to adapt easily to this.
History of controversy and politically connected are likely highly subjective categorisations.
As is no prior experience.
99% of PPE was imported previously whereas now 70% is manufactured in the UK so of course many would not have prior experience of manufacturing PPE. Doesn't mean they don't have transferable prior experience in something different that enables them to adapt easily to this.
Have you looked into what they class as "no prior experience" or are you just guessing?
History of controversy and politically connected are likely highly subjective categorisations.
So is no prior experience....who has prior experience for a once in a 100 year pandemic. And it is subjective
Some of those who didn't have "experience" delivered because they already had contacts in wider supply chain e.g. the outrage story of a couple of weeks ago of the guy from Florida doing PPE..he had no experience in PPE directly, but a lot of experience and contacts in Chinese supply chain.
That's different from the pub landlord from Hancock's local story.
History of controversy and politically connected are likely highly subjective categorisations.
Of course. But against that, the NYT is considerably more objective than (say) the Guardian.
Is it....I am not sure I agree with you there. Under ex BBC head honcho they became super interested in UK politics and very one sided. I would say they are equal to the Guardian.
History of controversy and politically connected are likely highly subjective categorisations.
So is no prior experience....who has prior experience for a once in a 100 year pandemic. And it is subjective
Some of those who didn't have "experience" delivered because they already had contacts in wider supply chain e.g. the outrage story of a couple of weeks ago of the guy from Florida doing PPE..he had no experience in PPE directly, but a lot of experience and contacts in Chinese supply chain.
That's different from the pub landlord from Hancock's local story.
We've of course already discussed the morality of already very wealthy people making millions off the back of a national emergency instead of simply donating their "contacts" to the government.
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
You realise calling him that makes him sound like one of the Smurfs ?
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
An outlier. 17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
Some unknowable but significant part of that 58% must be down to Johnson's snaggle-toothed and flabby presence in No.10. The SNP have to act while here is still there.
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Perhaps, but it's entirely possible that some of the movement is permanent. If Sturgeon has persuaded people that they can't rely on the UK government to protect them from a deadly pandemic then you can see why they would want a government of their own that would act to do so.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
Though healthcare is already devolved to Scotland isn't it?
If it was a case of Scotland 400 vs England 900 you might have a point but it isn't.
Plus of course by being a part of the UK it has to be noteworthy that Scotland is at the front of the queue for vaccinations - had an independent Scotland within the EU joined the EU scheme instead then they'd be waiting months while England rolled out its vaccine.
Healthcare is devolved, but most of the effective action to control spread of the virus has involved massive borrowing to fund furlough for lockdown - the devolved governments have been dependent on Westminster for that.
The relevant comparison isn't between Scotland and England, it's between Scotland as-is and Scotland-as-might-have-been as represented by a nearby independent country with a similar population.
So a Scotland independent of and therefore outside of the EU?
Comments
Were some people saying peak Indy/SNP had passed a few days ago?
Cough.
https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/1339282747047743492?s=19
Makes one wonder why we're bothering, really.
The EU is a dysfunctional institution. Once we've gotten out of it then we can build steadily a new path rather than facing these old arguments that have torn us asunder for the past four decades.
https://www.newsweek.com/california-becomes-first-us-state-report-50000-new-covid-cases-1-day-1555329
People always think we're going to be refighting the battles of the recent past rather than looking to the (as yet unforeseen) battles of the near future.
We've left the EU and like the tale of humpty dumpty it won't be getting put back together again. We're going to evolve down a different path.
https://twitter.com/SNPStudents/status/1339467106379816961?s=19
The director of Die Hard, John McTiernan, has released a short video explaining why the original Die Hard movie is a bona fide Christmas film.
https://www.radiotimes.com/news/film/2020-12-17/john-mctiernan-die-hard-is-a-christmas-film/
In a joint letter to the chairs of the Commons Transport Select Committee and the Commons International Trade Committee, they wrote that some shipping costs have more than doubled compared with last year.
One food manufacturer has suffered lost sales worth more than £1 million due to a shortage during the crucial festive period, the letter stated.
The BRC and FDF want the committees to hold an inquiry into the chaos at ports and the functioning of the shipping market.
Though on the + side, it seems a more normal politics is being reestablished.
It seems to depend a lot on the employer - I've worked for employers who accepted staff being off for 6 months due to depression, and then welcomed them back on a gradual basis. I've never worked for a ruthless one like those described. To some extent it's a class thing, I suspect - the lower-status your job, the less leeway employers tend to offer. (Which should be the way illegal - all staff should be treated in the samer way on this.)
Making out as if that's some sort of relevation, when it's been obvious from the data, PHW have been fairly open about it, and the 11,000 number was in their official statement yesterday. Although it is indeed staggering that they would allow "planned maintenance" to distort the data in this way at the height of a pandemic.
The work rate of Liz Truss is phenomenal. Not only has she grandfathered (or bettered) all significant UK trade deals it held via the EU in 11 months, except Turkey, but she's also now advancing a US-UK mini-deal:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55341970
On top of that, don't forget she's also Minister for Women and Equalities.
She gave a common sense decision to the consultation on reform of the Gender Recognition Act in September and, today, she's hit out at identity politics and signalled a pivot away from “fashionable” race, sexuality and gender issues to poverty and geographical disparities - including rebasing it in the north:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/12/16/pivot-fashionable-race-sexuality-gender-issues-focus-poverty/
I have been seriously considering her odds as next Prime Minister this morning. After reviewing the market, I think the 100/1 with William Hill is stonking value. I've hoovered up as much as I can.
DYOR.
We no longer have to face the arguments which have torn us asunder....
Utter clown show. Tories used to be party of business. Seems the party is full now of people who have no idea whatsoever how business works.
*I've also had time off when my wife and I have had miscarriages. I don't know what the official employer policy in those circumstances is, but I had a week the first time, which was enough for me to get myself back together and be productive when I came back - my workload didn't change and I did longer hours over the next few weeks t catch up, which suited me fine. Shorter times on the other occasions, as I didn't need as long. For another family member in the same situation, her husband was expected back at work the next day (even though he was in a job where others could take over his work). He described himself as a zombie for the next few weeks and left the employer as soon as he was able to find another position.
17th outlier in a row, but still an outlier.
She came back in due time, then two months later announced that she'd be off on maternity leave again soon.
And shortly after she came back from that she'd fallen again!
Just out so the full tables not yet available.
With DKs the figure is Yes 52%, No 38%, DK 10%
There's other articles breaking down the leadership favourability questions (summary, Sturgeon is untouchable unless you are a moron, alas the SNP is full of morons)
To delay action is the same as death, as Father Lenin said.
Some of us are going to knuckle down to make sure that new path is a reality. Underpinned by the knowledge that the democratic process has been greatly enhanced: both by getting out from under an EU that has a deep distrust of democracy - because those pesky voters use it to thwart their Project - and proving that the voters DO have a voice to which politicans must listen.
Not my problem that such things mean so little to you.
If I had backed Trump with Betfair, I wouldn't hope for the result to be overturned or the market reopened. That would be too ambitious. I would however ask for a refund of all bets placed between 7th November, by which time the Networks had unanimously projected the Electoral Votes in favour of Biden, and the 14th December when Betfair rather arbitrarily decided to settle the market on the basis of actual ECVs.
I think I'd have a case.
We will move on from arguments about Europe primarily to other arguments and Sindyref II is going to be up there near the top.
I for one will be cheering on from the sidelines the Yes campaign in the inevitable second Sindyref. Only once Scotland becomes a sovereign country can and will it start to move on from every issue being a battle with London.
Eg, with the $markets "Noel Edmonds" market on Brexit. I have long had a confidence close to certainty that we will never be No Dealing, so when at the height of the hype last week No Deal went odds on favourite at 1.84, it appeared on the face of it a slam dunk betting opportunity - lay it for loads.
But, ooo what's this, the Small Print. If there's a Deal teed up but it doesn't get signed off by 31 Dec, so there's a short extension to approve and implement, say, whatever that might be called, it's into a grey area for the bet and quite likely it's a loser. So I passed. Didn't do it.
We're no mugs, here on PB.com.
There's nothing arbitrary about that. I know that you disagree but the simple matter of law is that there was nothing legally official about the networks 'declaration' on the 7th November. The official declaration was 14 December.
Still have pm Gove as a saver tho’.
If the shift is as fundamental as that then it won't swing back.
Independent Republic of Ireland has 431 deaths per million. The UK 963, Northern Ireland 604.
If it was a case of Scotland 400 vs England 900 you might have a point but it isn't.
Plus of course by being a part of the UK it has to be noteworthy that Scotland is at the front of the queue for vaccinations - had an independent Scotland within the EU joined the EU scheme instead then they'd be waiting months while England rolled out its vaccine.
It's a pity we couldn't have had an Australian style pandemic repsonse instead of an Australian style every-fucking-thing else.
From 7th November there were projections that Biden had won.
On 14th December when the Electoral Votes were actually cast that projection was confirmed.
BetVictor didn't pay out to 14th December but their market was suspended from the 4th onwards, Betfair should have done the same and that wording could possibly cost them an awful lot of money (and it should do on duty of care reasons alone).
But it's not worth arguing over as we are all trying to remember what the Betfair market actually said. The issue is that Betfair royally and completely and utterly screwed up here and have cost some people who didn't know better (so shouldn't have been betting in the first place) a lot of money.
There is also Brexit. Which has, in a sense, not happened yet.
In Florida 2000 with the same Terms and Conditions as 2020 the "projection" initially was that Gore won. In the end Bush won it. Did Betfair pay out on Gore as a winner because that was the first projection? Of course not.
Or go further back and there was a newspaper that famously projected that Dewey beat Truman. Did that mean that bookies around with the same Ts and Cs then would have paid out on Dewey? Of course not.
The terms do say projection but they don't say which projection they go off. Is it the first projection? Or the final projection? In the past they have paid on the final projection not the first projection quite rightly and waiting for the official results waits to see if the projection changes.
The LOL was at the notion that somehow all political argument over this would cease.
The relevant comparison isn't between Scotland and England, it's between Scotland as-is and Scotland-as-might-have-been as represented by a nearby independent country with a similar population.
I can recall a world where women talked of having to leave their jobs because they'd married. Mother-in-law for one.
My mother ran her own pharmacy so the issue didn't arise!
https://ew.com/movies/2018/07/15/bruce-willis-die-hard-not-christmas-movie/
I wonder if TSE denies Home Alone being a Christmas movie?
99% of PPE was imported previously whereas now 70% is manufactured in the UK so of course many would not have prior experience of manufacturing PPE. Doesn't mean they don't have transferable prior experience in something different that enables them to adapt easily to this.
But against that, the NYT is considerably more objective than (say) the Guardian.
Whilst firms with experience but no political connections were ignored is also fine?
Some of those who didn't have "experience" delivered because they already had contacts in wider supply chain e.g. the outrage story of a couple of weeks ago of the guy from Florida doing PPE..he had no experience in PPE directly, but a lot of experience and contacts in Chinese supply chain.
That's different from the pub landlord from Hancock's local story.
Hope Macron's alright.
Elsewhere:
https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1339363701065830400