Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

26 minutes ago, 47er said:

Well, don't forget to come on and acknowledge your mistake when the infection rates rise.

I'm not making the rules and I NEVER said the infection rates won't rise, stop making things up.

As soon as we come out of lockdown infection rates will rise, no doubt about it, but I can assure you teachers are at very low risk.

Its front line services such as taxi drivers, bus drivers, supermarket workers, security guards, service industry staff that are at high risk, not teachers.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/covid-deaths-risk-covid-ons-b901047.html

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/chief-medical-officer-teaching-isnt-high-risk-profession/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55795608

 

Edited by Gav
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 15.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • chaddyrovers

    1366

  • Gav

    1258

  • den

    1089

  • philipl

    994

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

False dichotomy alert. I don't quite see how the two are related. I mean it's not an either or is it? Given the furlough and mortgage schemes (both excellent btw) are already in place before Cumm

Have spent a couple of days thinking what to write on here as I am utterly bewildered as to what this so called government is up to regarding schools. Firstly, before Christmas my school had seve

as you know i dont post on here anymore but i will this once just to wish everyone the best and hope everyone stays safe and comes thru at the other side  of this sad mess.  i would also like to

Posted Images

2 hours ago, 47er said:

How's that then---because you don't like Unions?

David Blunkett slamming the unions, not me and he's spot on too:

That is what makes the teaching unions’ decision to fight to block this return and to keep the classrooms closed for longer so inexplicable: it will cause untold potential damage to millions of young lives.

And it will not be the well-off, well-educated families who will lose out if we fail to act. Their children are often in well-funded schools offering something close to a full-time curriculum online. Preventing children from getting an education by refusing to return to the classroom will punish some of the most vulnerable children in the country and have a deeply damaging effect on social mobility. That is why the continued opposition of the teaching unions to the reopening of schools is both destructive and wrong.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9288825/A-devastating-assault-unions-fighting-return-classrooms-DAVID-BLUNKETT.html

Edited by Gav
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Isn't double and triple billing for items corruption Dom?.

Yep but I was referring to dishing out contracts to hancocks mate who used to run the local pub. 

Double and triple billing would be horrendous incompetence if we actually went ahead and paid for it. Surely that's not a sizeable problem?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 "Unions refusing to return to the classroom"........What's Blunkett on about ? 

Head teachers and teachers unions were alarmed by the publication of documents by Sage warning that the opening of primary and secondary schools could increase R by up to 50%

The unions have rightly questioned plans for all children in England to be back at school on March 8 because it risks prolonging the damaging cycle of stop-start schooling.

Data published by the Office for National Statistics on Monday confirmed union fears that teachers have a higher probability of testing positive for Covid than most other occupations.

As the NASUWT said. “...... the full reopening of schools will bring nearly 10 million pupils and staff into circulation in England – close to one fifth of the population.

“This is not a small easing of lockdown restrictions. It is a massive step.”

Scotland and Wales are having a phased return, which is surely a more sensible approach  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Gav said:

David Blunkett slamming the unions, not me:

That is what makes the teaching unions’ decision to fight to block this return and to keep the classrooms closed for longer so inexplicable: it will cause untold potential damage to millions of young lives.

And it will not be the well-off, well-educated families who will lose out if we fail to act. Their children are often in well-funded schools offering something close to a full-time curriculum online. Preventing children from getting an education by refusing to return to the classroom will punish some of the most vulnerable children in the country and have a deeply damaging effect on social mobility. That is why the continued opposition of the teaching unions to the reopening of schools is both destructive and wrong.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9288825/A-devastating-assault-unions-fighting-return-classrooms-DAVID-BLUNKETT.html

The likes of Blunkett were the reason why Labour went from having a majority of over a hundred to losing power. Complete ham shanker  in a long list of New Labour ham shankers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jim mk2 said:

 "Unions refusing to return to the classroom"........What's Blunkett on about ? 

Head teachers and teachers unions were alarmed by the publication of documents by Sage warning that the opening of primary and secondary schools could increase R by up to 50%

The unions have rightly questioned plans for all children in England to be back at school on March 8 because it risks prolonging the damaging cycle of stop-start schooling.

Data published by the Office for National Statistics on Monday confirmed union fears that teachers have a higher probability of testing positive for Covid than most other occupations.

As the NASUWT said. “...... the full reopening of schools will bring nearly 10 million pupils and staff into circulation in England – close to one fifth of the population.

“This is not a small easing of lockdown restrictions. It is a massive step.”

Scotland and Wales are having a phased return, which is surely a more sensible approach  

 

 

Let's not forget schools have been open all the time and teachers have been working all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Let's not forget schools have been open all the time and teachers have been working all the time.

Yes, but they're unionised, lazy public sector workers with "gold-plated" pensions (credit: right wing trolls ad nauseum)

No surprise to see Blunkett and the Mail perpetuating the myths. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Opening schools 'may increase spread of Covid by 50%'|Tes

SAGE want a phased re-opening of schools, and fear an increased spread of up to 50% when they do re-open. 

Has Bozo stopped listening to the science again?

Luckily the Unions are listening to the science and trying to  protect the people they represent. 

Edited by Hoochie Bloochie Mama
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Yes, but they're unionised, lazy public sector workers with "gold-plated" pensions (credit: right wing trolls ad nauseum)

No surprise to see Blunkett and the Mail perpetuating the myths. 

When you see a " Labour " politician writing in the " Mail " it tells me all I need to know. Jack Straw is another waster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

 "Unions refusing to return to the classroom"........What's Blunkett on about ? 

Head teachers and teachers unions were alarmed by the publication of documents by Sage warning that the opening of primary and secondary schools could increase R by up to 50%

The unions have rightly questioned plans for all children in England to be back at school on March 8 because it risks prolonging the damaging cycle of stop-start schooling.

Data published by the Office for National Statistics on Monday confirmed union fears that teachers have a higher probability of testing positive for Covid than most other occupations.

As the NASUWT said. “...... the full reopening of schools will bring nearly 10 million pupils and staff into circulation in England – close to one fifth of the population.

“This is not a small easing of lockdown restrictions. It is a massive step.”

Scotland and Wales are having a phased return, which is surely a more sensible approach  

 

 

The logic explained yesterday was that pre-vaccine, there was a direct link between a rising R rate and death. With the vaccine it breaks that link so R rising by 50% isnt as horrific as it sounds. It's a hell of a balance to find though.

Other than that I agree with most of what you say. Schools are a massive spreader. My mum works in a school and she said even in smaller class sizes, social distancing is impossible to maintain and kids are inherently unhygienic and will cough and sneeze in your face. I cant see the logic behind saying a supermarket worker behind a bit of flexi glass, 2m away from customers who are wearing a mask is more of a risk than schools. 

Add to that the stats clearly show cases rocket shortly after schools went back and started falling after we shut schools in Jan. 

Teachers may be at less risk of dying but, as has been drummed into me all year, its about who you pass it on to and schools spread it. 

That said it's such an unenviable position to be in cos schools need to open asap. I think a phased return or alternating days or something with testing galore would be the best approach. 

Edited by RoverDom
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

When you see a " Labour " politician writing in the " Mail " it tells me all I need to know. Jack Straw is another waster.

Blunkett also wrote for the S*n shortly after he had to resign from cabinet after he was found out to be corrupt. 

1 hour ago, Gav said:

David Blunkett slamming the unions, not me and he's spot on too:

That is what makes the teaching unions’ decision to fight to block this return and to keep the classrooms closed for longer so inexplicable: it will cause untold potential damage to millions of young lives.

And it will not be the well-off, well-educated families who will lose out if we fail to act. Their children are often in well-funded schools offering something close to a full-time curriculum online. Preventing children from getting an education by refusing to return to the classroom will punish some of the most vulnerable children in the country and have a deeply damaging effect on social mobility. That is why the continued opposition of the teaching unions to the reopening of schools is both destructive and wrong.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9288825/A-devastating-assault-unions-fighting-return-classrooms-DAVID-BLUNKETT.html

Why is he so worried about schools surely his love child must have left school by now.

Edited by Ewood Ace
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the vaccine roll out going so well, we have no need to change the current course set out by JVC, but here are some official figures that tell us who should be vaccinated, if we change course and target occupational groups:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55795608

Breaking that down by role, secondary school teachers appear to have a very slightly elevated risk at 39 deaths per 100,000 people in men and 21 per 100,000 in women.

Per 100,000 men aged 20-64, 31 died in the population as a whole compared with:

119 restaurant and catering staff per 100,000

110 care workers

106 metal-working machine operatives

101 taxi drivers

100 security guards

79 nurses

Per 100,000 women aged 20-64, 17 died in the population as a whole compared with:

47 care workers per 100,000

32 social workers

27 sales or retail assistants

25 nurses

22 cleaners

21 secondary education teaching professionals

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

The likes of Blunkett were the reason why Labour went from having a majority of over a hundred to losing power. Complete ham shanker  in a long list of New Labour ham shankers.

The likes of Blunkett were why Labour had a majority of over a hundred in the first place; those in the Labour party opposed to him are why they now languish with just over a half of the number of seats they had.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RoverDom said:

Yep but I was referring to dishing out contracts to hancocks mate who used to run the local pub. 

Double and triple billing would be horrendous incompetence if we actually went ahead and paid for it. Surely that's not a sizeable problem?? 

Did Hancock's mate produce the required PPE need? 

You would need to be inside to see how much it's happens

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gav said:

Nobody is doing teachers an injustice, they're being used as a political football in the reality, they're at very low risk and shouting about how badly they're being treated in the media does them no favours in my book.

As I've already stated, teachers would be way down the list if we are vaccinating by occupation, the risk level is extremely low when compared to taxi drivers, bus drivers, supermarket workers and many more groups.

Interesting article, born out by public health data at local levels:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/covid-deaths-risk-covid-ons-b901047.html

Thankfully the government are following JCV advice and its working extremely well, long may that continue. 

 

Think that's a bit unfair Gav. I get kids have a lower transmission rate but even so, by secondary the numbers are still huge and imo dangerous.  They are pretty much all from different households which increases the risk. They are stuck with them in a room for a long time further increasing the risk. 2 meters isn't at all practical in schools. And that's just from the kids! That's not factoring in any other adults they may have to work with or having to travel into work. Sure get there's an element of that for all jobs but it seems a tall order. 

Was thinking like this Vs a taxi driver or shop worker. Let's say a teacher sees 4 classes of 30 kids, ignoring any other contacts that's 120 contacts. Would a taxi driver take that many fares? Admittedly much closer contact but I think number of exposures is lower. Or in a supermarket would they really be in close contact with a person for an hour or so like in a lesson? 

It's a tricky decision and there are lots of other roles that need it too but I do think teachers are more at risk then you think. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Did Hancock's mate produce the required PPE need? 

You would need to be inside to see how much it's happens

You simply can't admit they do anything wrong. Is there no moral compass? 

There's a few elements to this being cronyism, and whether they produced the stuff or not is one element of it. But I'm wasting my breath - they could bump off your family and you wouldn't ever say the words the government were wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/23/china-did-little-hunt-covid-origins-early-months-says-who-document

Not a surprise. There’s a lot we will never find out about this virus simply because of the country it was discovered in. 

Hard to believe a Guardian exclusive when just yesterday they were called out for lying by Chris Whitty. Also weren't you trying to discredit WHO just the other day? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Hard to believe a Guardian exclusive when just yesterday they were called out for lying by Chris Whitty. Also weren't you trying to discredit WHO just the other day? 

I think you need to take a look back at what was said EA. I don’t think I discredited them. 
 

The Guardian has only reported on a WHO document - you have great respect for them so I will just assume you also respect this. 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

Corrupt government led by racist, lying prime minister and cabinet of inept ministers including a law-breaking health minister buys dodgy PPE equipment for its frontline health workers. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56167916

This on a day when Hancock has been making nonsensical excuses to the media all day for his lawless behaviour by endlessly asserting that there was no PPE crisis in the early stages of the  pandemic.

Disgusting, as Green-voting Tories would say. 

 

 

Edited by jim mk2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue blood said:

You simply can't admit they do anything wrong. Is there no moral compass? 

There's a few elements to this being cronyism, and whether they produced the stuff or not is one element of it. But I'm wasting my breath - they could bump off your family and you wouldn't ever say the words the government were wrong. 

It's only " Cronyism " in the UK, anywhere else it's " Corruption ".

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Hard to believe a Guardian exclusive when just yesterday they were called out for lying by Chris Whitty. 

A very good paper at one time EA, has now completely lost the plot, it started in 2016 and they'll never recover. 

 

 

Edited by Gav
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

The likes of Blunkett were why Labour had a majority of over a hundred in the first place; those in the Labour party opposed to him are why they now languish with just over a half of the number of seats they had.

Labour won inspite of the likes of Blunkett not because of him.  The bottom line was the Tories had made themselves un-electable, the electorate had had enough and wanted a change. 

Edited by Tyrone Shoelaces
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gav said:

A very good paper at one time EA, has now completely lost the plot, it started in 2016 and they'll never recover. 

Guardian digital subscriptions up 43% in 2020 and print subscriptions to the Guardian, the Observer and its international news magazine Guardian Weekly at record levels.

Not bad for an outlet "has completely lost the plot and will never recover" 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.