Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

The official Corona virus C**T list



narly101

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2009
2,683
London
FT -
Mary Bousted, joint general secretary, said the plans were “entirely premature” while infection rates remained high and there was “a complete absence of community testing and contact tracing”.

“We are saying formally [to members], don’t engage in planning meetings,” Ms Bousted added. “We are not going to be bound by June 1.”


The reactions follow growing pressure as other countries around Europe start to reopen schools against a backdrop of calls to allow parents to return to work and concern that children, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds, risk long term detriment to their education. The World Health Organization has also released guidance on reopenings.

Not talking helps no one - either side - doesnt help the case they are trying to make and valid points they have.

I think you need to do a little bit more digging before you start throwing shit at teachers.
 




keaton

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
Nov 18, 2004
9,975
FT -
Mary Bousted, joint general secretary, said the plans were “entirely premature” while infection rates remained high and there was “a complete absence of community testing and contact tracing”.

“We are saying formally [to members], don’t engage in planning meetings,” Ms Bousted added. “We are not going to be bound by June 1.”


The reactions follow growing pressure as other countries around Europe start to reopen schools against a backdrop of calls to allow parents to return to work and concern that children, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds, risk long term detriment to their education. The World Health Organization has also released guidance on reopenings.


Not talking helps no one - either side - doesnt help the case they are trying to make and valid points they have.

That's not them refusing to discuss it, it's the opposite in fact. They are saying individual teachers should not be involved in this, the Unions will be and they will advise teachers.
 


Jimmy Grimble

Well-known member
Nov 10, 2007
10,103
Starting a revolution from my bed
FT -
Mary Bousted, joint general secretary, said the plans were “entirely premature” while infection rates remained high and there was “a complete absence of community testing and contact tracing”.

“We are saying formally [to members], don’t engage in planning meetings,” Ms Bousted added. “We are not going to be bound by June 1.”


The reactions follow growing pressure as other countries around Europe start to reopen schools against a backdrop of calls to allow parents to return to work and concern that children, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds, risk long term detriment to their education. The World Health Organization has also released guidance on reopenings.


Not talking helps no one - either side - doesnt help the case they are trying to make and valid points they have.

That is what was sent to teachers of one Union. It refers to planning meetings with their respective school leaders, not discussions with the government.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52650259


In their joint statement, nine unions, including the National Education Union and the National Association of Head Teachers, rejected the plans for a phased return of primary school pupils after half term - saying it was still too early to be safe.

The unions called for a delay until a "full roll-out of a national test and trace scheme" was in place and there were extra resources for cleaning, protective equipment and risk assessments.

The joint statement said that "classrooms of four and five-year olds could become sources of Covid-19 transmission and spread".

"We call on the government to step back from the 1st June and work with us to create the conditions for a safe return to schools."

They are very clearly not refusing to discuss.
 




Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,793
hassocks
That is what was sent to teachers of one Union. It refers to planning meetings with their respective school leaders, not discussions with the government.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52650259


In their joint statement, nine unions, including the National Education Union and the National Association of Head Teachers, rejected the plans for a phased return of primary school pupils after half term - saying it was still too early to be safe.

The unions called for a delay until a "full roll-out of a national test and trace scheme" was in place and there were extra resources for cleaning, protective equipment and risk assessments.

The joint statement said that "classrooms of four and five-year olds could become sources of Covid-19 transmission and spread".

"We call on the government to step back from the 1st June and work with us to create the conditions for a safe return to schools."

They are very clearly not refusing to discuss.


Whilst advising teachers that may want to go back to refuse to discuss locally.
 




narly101

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2009
2,683
London
And then you read articles like this;

https://www.theguardian.com/educati...ld-fuel-coronavirus-spread-dfe-adviser-admits

So DfE admit that opening schools are likely to fuel coronavirus spread :ffsparr: They've also admitted that it wasn't a department decision, but that it came from SAGE;

"Rahman’s evidence is likely to result in headteachers thinking again about reopening, throwing the government’s timetable into doubt. It will also raise questions about the DfE’s level of involvement in the decision-making process behind the reopening, after Rahman told MPs: “That was not a departmental decision, that was a cabinet decision following advice from Sage.”
 


narly101

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2009
2,683
London
Why? are they completely immune to criticism?

Not at all, but you've decided to lump teachers and the unions in the Coronavirus **** List. They really can't be lined up with the likes of Branson et al.

Given the decidedly vague direction from the government on how schools are supposed to open up and maintain a safe environment for the pupils (and their families) and teachers/care assistants etc, I think it's entirely appropriate that teachers should not be given the responsibility on discussing and agreeing a way on how to do this. Unless of course you would expect ALL employers to pass on their responsibilities to their employees for their safety?
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,245
Faversham
That's not them refusing to discuss it, it's the opposite in fact. They are saying individual teachers should not be involved in this, the Unions will be and they will advise teachers.

Someone (to whom you were replying) needs to read up on the reasons for the formation, and the resultant creation of collective bargaining triggered by: unions.

They also need to take off their Thatcher-tinted spectacles whenever unions are mentioned.

(And I say that as someone in a union that I regard as a club for my least competant colleagues to plot revolution over tea and hobnobs while taking their eye off the actual ball flying over their heads)
 






Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
20,757
Eastbourne

This is a telling quote from the article and is one which the government has neatly side-stepped the issue of teacher safety, with answers that typically stress the low incidence of bad cases of covid 19 in children whilst ignoring the possible problems for adults.

'Rahman told the committee there was little evidence to suggest children transmit the virus any differently from adults. “There are some studies which suggest that they might transmit it less than adults, but this evidence is mixed, it’s quite early, and so there is a low degree of confidence among Sage [the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies] currently in the evidence which suggests that they might transmit it less.”'
 


keaton

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
Nov 18, 2004
9,975
This is a telling quote from the article and is one which the government has neatly side-stepped with answers that typically stress the low incidence of bad cases of covid 19 in children whilst ignoring the possible problems for adults.

'Rahman told the committee there was little evidence to suggest children transmit the virus any differently from adults. “There are some studies which suggest that they might transmit it less than adults, but this evidence is mixed, it’s quite early, and so there is a low degree of confidence among Sage [the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies] currently in the evidence which suggests that they might transmit it less.”'
As I posted somewhere the limited info they sent to schools mentioned evidence that children were less likely to get ill, it didn't mention anything about transmission. I would assume they'd be circulating any evidence they have about that
 




Billy the Fish

Technocrat
Oct 18, 2005
17,594
Haywards Heath
I think there needs to be a serious and transparent conversation about what we're trying to achieve.

The initial plan was to flatten the curve and stop the NHS getting overwhelmed. I think in some people's mind that has morphed into stop transmission at any cost until there's a vaccine.

That doesn't seem viable to me. Sooner or later we're going to have to risk people in the low risk groups getting it and building up immunity.
Government have to be honest about the accepted risk otherwise everyone will get their knickers in a twist.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,585
Deepest, darkest Sussex
What is it about Williamson? He must be the creepiest of the current crop. He could go straight into a Hammer film.

He should never have been allowed into Government again after he leaked highly secret Government documents to the press. Sod it, he shouldn't have been allowed into Parliament again.
 






Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
56,245
Faversham
I think there needs to be a serious and transparent conversation about what we're trying to achieve.

The initial plan was to flatten the curve and stop the NHS getting overwhelmed. I think in some people's mind that has morphed into stop transmission at any cost until there's a vaccine.

That doesn't seem viable to me. Sooner or later we're going to have to risk people in the low risk groups getting it and building up immunity.
Government have to be honest about the accepted risk otherwise everyone will get their knickers in a twist.

Unfortunately 'as we reduce restrictions some of you who are safe now will die' is not a message likely to be received favourably if illuminated by the daylight of transparency.

I'd prefer 'the less said the better' strategy . . . .albeit only if I had faith that HMG are focused primarily on the best possible outcome for the greatest number of people, rather than the best possible outcome for their own PR and future electoral prospects. Many of them are but there is a heart of darkness at work in there....(*cough* Cummings *cough*)

Tonight's pothole initiative, 'making roads safer for cars and busses and motorcycles and, er..' (go carts, milk floats, Sinclair C5s?) was more needless chutzpah that had me reaching for the sick bag....
 




Dick Swiveller

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2011
9,537
Steve Coogan for furloughing his gardeners and housekeeper and giving the usual suspects the chance to rant about leftie hypocrites.
 


nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
18,593
Gods country fortnightly
Steve Coogan for furloughing his gardeners and housekeeper and giving the usual suspects the chance to rant about leftie hypocrites.

Poor from Coogan

But, I blame a poorly thought out system to keep people in work, its open to abuse and results on poor productivity.

Sunak it seems can only walk on water, I'm afraid our system is so far away from best global practice
 






A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
20,585
Deepest, darkest Sussex
I think this best sums up my thoughts on the matter.

[TWEET]1263383079927738368[/TWEET]
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here