Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IV - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

CruelSummer

silverharp wrote: »

is someone missing a trick in Ireland, seems like a clever idea.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1279313016161435654

I've seen some advertisements for drive-in movies in my area, great idea in the current circumstances.

Penfailed

For those that were complaining about our travel restrictions and saying that nowhere else was doing it...you are currently STILL restricted to 5 miles in Wales.

CruelSummer

Re travel, I worry for the upcoming Autumn / Winter if this is going to be the Government's way of dealing with things. No decision made at all. It doesn't bode well for upcoming decisions on reducing Restrictions further and being brave enough to do so if the conditions allow.

There is no reason why the Green list couldn't be published now, it would give Tourism Ireland a chance to market Ireland to some countries in the EU with low Covid, and allow holidaymakers to travel to the sun without having to quarantine.

The fact that no-one thought to set up a single screening programme at our airports is astonishing to me. If people can enter from the US, Middle East, Asia, etc., there should be something more than form filling to screen these passengers.

Damiencm

Penfailed wrote:

For those that were complaining about our travel restrictions and saying that nowhere else was doing it...you are currently STILL restricted to 5 miles in Wales.

How is it being enforced though? Is it a request or actual legislation?

The reason I ask is that although the Welsh assembly told Ryanair not to operate from Cardiff this week, Ryanair just ignored them.

Penfailed

Damiencm wrote: »

How is it being enforced though? Is it a request or actual legislation?

The reason I ask is that although the Welsh assembly told Ryanair not to operate from Cardiff this week, Ryanair just ignored them.

No idea. I'll endeavour to find out.

polesheep

charlie14 wrote: »

Not really as I`m not a recipient.

Neither am I under Jobseekers Allowance or the Pandemic Unemployment Payment Scheme.


As of yesterday anybody that is receiving payment under any of those three should be aware that according to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection should they go abroad on holidays they will not receive payment for the time away, or for the two week quarantine period upon their return.

Do you have an official link for that? I've searched and cannot find one. Or if anyone claiming Jobseekers has been notified of such can you please confirm? Thanks.

charlie14

polesheep wrote: »

Do you have an official link for that? I've searched and cannot find one. Or if anyone claiming Jobseekers has been notified of such can you please confirm? Thanks.

I first heard it on RTE yesterday evening and see that Extra.ie are reporting it today.

polesheep

charlie14 wrote: »

I first heard it on RTE yesterday evening and see that Extra.ie are reporting it today.

I saw that all right, but I can't find anything official. Not in receipt of SW myself, so not personally affected, but it would be outrageous discrimination if true and most likely illegal regarding the two weeks permitted holidays.

gmisk

polesheep wrote: »

Do you have an official link for that? I've searched and cannot find one. Or if anyone claiming Jobseekers has been notified of such can you please confirm? Thanks.

Department of social protection have confirmed it.

Going overseas against travel advice will cost claimants Jobseekers or PUP payments https://jrnl.ie/5140755

polesheep

gmisk wrote: »

Department of social protection have confirmed it.

Going overseas against travel advice will cost claimants Jobseekers or PUP payments https://jrnl.ie/5140755

Can't see how they can do this for the holiday period.

TaurenDruid

polesheep wrote: »

Can't see how they can do this for the holiday period.

I'm sure the argument will be on the lines of "Yes, you can take two weeks holiday if you let us know when. But going to somewhere where you must self-isolate for another two weeks when you return takes you out of the position of being available for work."

Though that would only cover 2 weeks, not 4.

polesheep

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I'm sure the argument will be on the lines of "Yes, you can take two weeks holiday if you let us know when. But going to somewhere where you must self-isolate for another two weeks when you return takes you out of the position of being available for work."

Though that would only cover 2 weeks, not 4.

Exactly, two weeks, not four. Singling out one cohort for mandatory application of an advisory can't be legal. Why the government can't make clear decisions, one way or the other, I don't know.

ZX7R

polesheep wrote: »

Exactly, two weeks, not four. Singling out one cohort for mandatory application of an advisory can't be legal. Why the government can't make clear decisions, one way or the other, I don't know.

They can legally stop holiday monies for foreign holidays as there is a do not travel issued.
Exceptions being

Family emergency/visit
Medical reasons

Second they can stop the payment for two weeks qurantine as it falls in the remit unable to work rather than looking for work.
The department acting on existing social welfare legislation.

polesheep

ZX7R wrote: »

They can legally stop holiday monies for foreign holidays as there is a do not travel issued.
Exceptions being

Family emergency/visit
Medical reasons

Second they can stop the payment for two weeks qurantine as it falls in the remit unable to work rather than looking for work.
The department acting on existing social welfare legislation.

No dispute with the second two weeks being stopped as they won't be available for work, but the do not travel is an advisory, it is not mandatory, therefore how can it be legal to stop the payment? I am retired but not old enough to be receiving the SW pension, so I have no skin in the game, but this is straightforward discrimination. There is no financial loss for me if I ignore the advisory. Is this how we're going to do things from now on, singling out certain groups for special treatment? If so, it's a very dangerous and slippery slope.

ZX7R

polesheep wrote: »

No dispute with the second two weeks being stopped as they won't be available for work, but the do not travel is an advisory, it is not mandatory, therefore how can it be legal to stop the payment? I am retired but not old enough to be receiving the SW pension, so I have no skin in the game, but this is straightforward discrimination. There is no financial loss for me if I ignore the advisory. Is this how we're going to do things from now on, singling out certain groups for special treatment? If so, it's a very dangerous and slippery slope.

The only way I could legally see them stop money for holidays in foreign travel would be by deception/ fraudulent claim
Ie that you knowingly leave the country and not be available for work on your return.
All it would take is trace the address from the mandatory address form.

Quantum Erasure

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I'm sure the argument will be on the lines of "Yes, you can take two weeks holiday if you let us know when. But going to somewhere where you must self-isolate for another two weeks when you return takes you out of the position of being available for work."

Though that would only cover 2 weeks, not 4.

"In line with this advice, the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection has recently updated the holiday procedures for Jobseekers, Supplementary Welfare Allowance and Pandemic Unemployment Payment schemes. On a temporary basis and as a consequence of the continuing Covid-19 pandemic, someone in receipt of one of these payments who travels abroad will not be entitled to a payment for that period and for the 14 day quarantine period on their return."

charlie14

ZX7R wrote: »

The only way I could legally see them stop money for holidays in foreign travel would be by deception/ fraudulent claim
Ie that you knowingly leave the country and not be available for work on your return.
All it would take is trace the address from the mandatory address form.

They did this back in early May with foreign workers, mostly Brazilians, leaving the country and that was the reason they gave for it.

charlie14

polesheep wrote: »

No dispute with the second two weeks being stopped as they won't be available for work, but the do not travel is an advisory, it is not mandatory, therefore how can it be legal to stop the payment? I am retired but not old enough to be receiving the SW pension, so I have no skin in the game, but this is straightforward discrimination. There is no financial loss for me if I ignore the advisory. Is this how we're going to do things from now on, singling out certain groups for special treatment? If so, it's a very dangerous and slippery slope.

I don`t know if it really is that discriminatory when compared to those working and not receiving any of those payments.
If they choose to take their normal two weeks holiday abroad rather than at home, their employers are not going to be paying them for the two weeks they have to quarantine upon their return. Let alone being happy with them being gone from work for an extra two weeks because of going abroad

polesheep

charlie14 wrote: »

I don`t know if it really is that discriminatory when compared to those working and not receiving any of those payments.
If they choose to take their normal two weeks holiday abroad rather than at home, their employers are not going to be paying them for the two weeks they have to quarantine upon their return. Let alone being happy with them being gone from work for an extra two weeks because of going abroad

But those working will be paid while on holiday. If you were out of work due to the restrictions and living on €350 would you be happy then with this arrangement? I wouldn't. I would feel that I was being victimised and I would be right.

joeguevara

Only found out today that if pub which serves food has2m between tables the 105 minute time limit is not applicable

charlie14

polesheep wrote: »

But those working will be paid while on holiday. If you were out of work due to the restrictions and living on €350 would you be happy then with this arrangement? I wouldn't. I would feel that I was being victimised and I would be right.

The point I was making is that those working will effectively be unable to take a holiday abroad due to having to quarantine for two weeks when they return..
Those receiving these payments would lose them when abroad and for the two weeks on their return. Those working would lose their wages for the two weeks on their return, plus the risk of losing their jobs also.
Basically while those receiving these payment holidaying abroad would lose a few weeks payments, for those employed to ignore the recommendation the loss is potentially much greater

CruelSummer

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/flights-ban-could-last-all-summer-39341017.html

If anyone cannot see this article if it’s behind a paywall I’ll post it. It basically surmises that Ireland is in fact some sort of Green Utopia on the edge of Europe that one doesn’t need to travel to and from.

What exactly are NPHET’s recommendations for testing snd screening at airports...still waiting...

What does ‘flight ban’ that could last all summer actually mean - does it mean refunds for families on their holidays, does it mean Aer Lingus and Ryanair to be allowed to fold? Particularly Aer Lingus which I understand the Government has a share in. Madness.

Allinall

CruelSummer wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/flights-ban-could-last-all-summer-39341017.html

If anyone cannot see this article if it’s behind a paywall I’ll post it. It basically surmises that Ireland is in fact some sort of Green Utopia on the edge of Europe that one doesn’t need to travel to and from.

What exactly are NPHET’s recommendations for testing snd screening at airports...still waiting...

What does ‘flight ban’ that could last all summer actually mean - does it mean refunds for families on their holidays, does it mean Aer Lingus and Ryanair to be allowed to fold? Particularly Aer Lingus which I understand the Government has a share in. Madness.

It’s the independent.

There’s no flight ban, so there will be no refunds if people don’t travel.

stephenjmcd

Allinall wrote: »

It’s the independent.

There’s no flight ban, so there will be no refunds if people don’t travel.

Exactly, flights will run, you don't travel that'll be your problem not the airlines.

There's no ban on anyone leaving the country for a holiday or any other purpose

ZX7R

CruelSummer wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/flights-ban-could-last-all-summer-39341017.html

If anyone cannot see this article if it’s behind a paywall I’ll post it. It basically surmises that Ireland is in fact some sort of Green Utopia on the edge of Europe that one doesn’t need to travel to and from.

What exactly are NPHET’s recommendations for testing snd screening at airports...still waiting...

What does ‘flight ban’ that could last all summer actually mean - does it mean refunds for families on their holidays, does it mean Aer Lingus and Ryanair to be allowed to fold? Particularly Aer Lingus which I understand the Government has a share in. Madness.

There won't be a ban on flights.
As much as people don't think our travel advisory and quarantine are not going to work , the reality is it might just.
Ireland is on most European countries list do not travel to because of our qurantine.
Daa figures show incoming and outgoing passengers at the moment are not even close to figures been floated around by Media.
Our travel advisory will be in place till July 20th when it's up for review.
Then based on evidence it will be decided if the green list will be made public.
Based on current Data Ireland has the lowest infection rate in Europe if this continues come the 20th we will have a reassessment and it be extended till the 3rd of August.
And if our figures are higher it will still be extended to try get numbers down.
If information been leaked by our government is to be believed the 17th of August is being a date flouted for schools reopening.
That will take out such a large amount of people planning to holiday overseas.
The social welfare blocking of payment will also reduce expected numbers that want to travel.
No green list also makes the purchase of foreign holidays extremely difficult.
Another reason that flights won't be stopped that seems to be overlooked is that figures released by the department of travel and foreign affairs stated that there was still in excess of 9000 people trying to return home from across the world.

TaurenDruid

ZX7R wrote: »

Based on current Data Ireland has the lowest infection rate in Europe

Long may this continue. But based on the pictures coming out of Dublin city centre last night, I unfortunately don't think that'll be the case.

If information been leaked by our government is to be believed the 17th of August is being a date flouted for schools reopening.

Where are you seeing this? First I've seen mention of it. Teachers - who are now on holiday - might have an expectation of more than five weeks notice they've to be back in work.

School principals and caretakers will certainly need more than five weeks to get everything resourced, procured, set up and in place before the start date!

CruelSummer

Allinall wrote: »

It’s the independent.

There’s no flight ban, so there will be no refunds if people don’t travel.

True but usually this is a Government 'leak' or kite flying exercise.

ZX7R

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Long may this continue. But based on the pictures coming out of Dublin city centre last night, I unfortunately don't think that'll be the case.



Where are you seeing this? First I've seen mention of it. Teachers - who are now on holiday - might have an expectation of more than five weeks notice they've to be back in work.

School principals and caretakers will certainly need more than five weeks to get everything resourced, procured, set up and in place before the start date!

Second last week in August has been touted many times for a return

acequion

ZX7R wrote: »

Second last week in August has been touted many times for a return

Touted from where?

The school year operates to a calender where primary must do 183 days and secondary 167. Schools are due back from the end of August. Bringing it forward to that extent would create a tsunami of reactions from unions to principals to parents. Not to mention everybody else.

Nothing would surprise me in this new crazy universe we inhabit but I can't see that happening.

Sammy2012

acequion wrote: »

Touted from where?

The school year operates to a calender where primary must do 183 days and secondary 167. Schools are due back from the end of August. Bringing it forward to that extent would create a tsunami of reactions from unions to principals to parents. Not to mention everybody else.

Nothing would surprise me in this new crazy universe we inhabit but I can't see that happening.

Not sure where you are getting this information from but its definitely not from any official channels. Altho to be honest I'd be happy to to back to work then.