School reopenings -current plan WAS McHugh's plan

Smacruairi

am_zarathustra wrote: »

I have to say the varience of response across schools is insane. There are schools building outdoor roofed Astros for lunch and schools doing nothing......I wonder will it draw attention to the less proactive principals out there

To be fair, if you're looking to build an astro, you need planning permission, funds, to get approval from your patron, have the free space, insurance etc. I see what you mean about proactivity to a point but there can also be throwing money around and putting lipstick on a pig too.

km79

http://twitter.com/ClassActionNew1/status/1295142156852658176

That sums up the feelings of a lot of us nicely

combat14

km79 wrote: »

http://twitter.com/ClassActionNew1/status/1295142156852658176

That sums up the feelings of a lot of us nicely

and just wait for any student, parent, teacher to get sick and the solicitor letters to start arriving in the door- principals will have to make sure every i is dotted and t crossed or there will be war

Will Yam

combat14 wrote: »

one has to wonder why all the office workers cant go back now before schools if it is safe for schools to do so .. ??

Office workers CAN go back. But advised not to if their work can be done from home.

Bobtheman

Are teachers allowed take up written work ??

Alex86Eire

Bobtheman wrote: »

Are teachers allowed take up written work ??

There was nothing officially said so individual schools are making the call. We were told we weren't allowed to take anything from students. Other posters seem to have been told they can if they leave the papers for ~ 72 hours before touching them themselves and after touching before giving them back to students.

am_zarathustra

All homework online in our place

History Queen

am_zarathustra wrote: »

All homework online in our place

Same with us

Parsnips

I really had to shout at the TV on Saturday when the statement came out about the schools being safer than homes becuase the last 100 cases of shild covid was all from the home. . . . . what is this bull**** they are peddling to the Irish people. where else do they think the children have been all this time. This is 100% going to be a catastrophe when schoools are fully opened.

khalessi

Parsnips wrote: »

I really had to shout at the TV on Saturday when the statement came out about the schools being safer than homes becuase the last 100 cases of shild covid was all from the home. . . . . what is this bull**** they are peddling to the Irish people. where else do they think the children have been all this time. This is 100% going to be a catastrophe when schoools are fully opened.

This BS is too ensure parents send their children to school so the reopening goes without a hitch and the government can pat themselves on the back

Bobtheman

Good piece in the Irish IND today. Pro teacher.
Same with Irish times
I'm happy enough to go back to school but I feel it's wrong to force teachers with underlying health conditions to go. Serious ones.
Also no over riding inspection and no plan for online learning. Disgraceful on all accounts.

Treppen

Bobtheman wrote: »

Good piece in the Irish IND today. Pro teacher.
Same with Irish times
I'm happy enough to go back to school but I feel it's wrong to force teachers with underlying health conditions to go. Serious ones.
Also no over riding inspection and no plan for online learning. Disgraceful on all accounts.

online learning IS going to be taking place whether we like it or not. I bet the Minister will just keep repeating the mantra about all the millions "they" spent!

Rosita

Treppen wrote: »

online learning IS going to be taking place whether we like it or not. I bet the Minister will just keep repeating the mantra about all the millions "they" spent!

Hard to imagine it won't but the "they're much more likely to catch it at home" angle of recent days suggests to me that even if there are outbreaks in schools they'll stick with the idea that schools are the safest possible place, they couldn't possibly have been infected there, and keep them going at all costs.

treade1

https://youtu.be/nHqz-Wk3hus

This Oxford Professor is a rock of sense. He's calm, reassuring and it looks increasingly like he is correct. Schools will be no more dangerous this winter than they are any other winter. In fact they might even be safer than normal with some social distancing, the toilets actually getting cleaned properly and the fact that parents will be less likely to dose their kids up on Nurofen plus and send them to school hoping for the best.

Will Yam

Bobtheman wrote: »

Good piece in the Irish IND today. Pro teacher.
Same with Irish times
I'm happy enough to go back to school but I feel it's wrong to force teachers with underlying health conditions to go. Serious ones.
Also no over riding inspection and no plan for online learning. Disgraceful on all accounts.

Surely teachers are free to stay home and claim Covid payments?

Will Yam

Just watched Norma Foley on prime time.

I have to say, against my expectation, she was pretty good.

In spite (or maybe because) of the prize clown interviewing her.

mirrorwall14

Will Yam wrote: »

Just watched Norma Foley on prime time.

I have to say, against my expectation, she was pretty good.

In spite (or maybe because) of the prize clown interviewing her.

She coped a lot better than I thought but really there are still no real answers to any questions. She answered like a very good politician which gives me a little more confidence she actually knows what she's doing

petejmk

Will Yam wrote: »

Just watched Norma Foley on prime time.

I have to say, against my expectation, she was pretty good.

In spite (or maybe because) of the prize clown interviewing her.

Ah she couldn't even get the detail right on masks. She says they're compulsory at second level. The dept say they're recommended. Which is it? Another mixed msg from this mess of a govt.

SligoBrewer

Will Yam wrote: »

Just watched Norma Foley on prime time.

I have to say, against my expectation, she was pretty good.

In spite (or maybe because) of the prize clown interviewing her.

She wasn't.

Bobtheman

While there are always two sides to a story I find it outrageous that teachers with serious medical conditions are being forced into work. I hope there are solicitors letters flying. I think it's the only thing they take seriously.

wirelessdude01

Very clear Norma was sent on some sort of media bootcamp during her absence. Little smiles that are meant to defuse, obsessive use of her hands, learned the trick of waffling without actually giving a definitive answer, the art of deflecting onto something/one else, muddying the water just enough(masks) that people still aren't sure but that it looks like she gave a definitive answer.

Anyone who says she did well are grasping at straws. To the casual observer, yes it was a definite improvement, but to those of us who actually have to live with this rubbish it was a definite improvement in deflecting blame onto others and leaving us more confused.

Also thought that she kinda left the door open to a further delay for the LC results.

Mardy Bum

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

.

Also thought that she kinda left the door open to a further delay for the LC results.

Martin's Radio 1 interview all but confirmed a delay as well. Joe McHugh told the Sunday Times that he was told in June that school profiling wouldn't be happening despite everyone being informed previous school results would be used as a guide.

Treppen

Bobtheman wrote: »

While there are always two sides to a story I find it outrageous that teachers with serious medical conditions are being forced into work. I hope there are solicitors letters flying. I think it's the only thing they take seriously.

Here's one ....
Teacher pregnant with heart condition and doctor tells her to stay home as she's very high risk. Medmark says no you're only high risk so in you go.

But get this... Her husband is told to stay at home because his wife is high risk!!

Will Yam

Bobtheman wrote: »

While there are always two sides to a story I find it outrageous that teachers with serious medical conditions are being forced into work. I hope there are solicitors letters flying. I think it's the only thing they take seriously.

If someone has a medical condition which prevents them working they can get a doctors cert.

What did all the doctors, nurses, guards, supermarket staff, hairdressers who had serious medical conditions do?

wirelessdude01

Treppen wrote: »

Here's one ....
Teacher pregnant with heart condition and doctor tells her to stay home as she's very high risk. Medmark says no you're only high risk so in you go.

But get this... Her husband is told to stay at home because his wife is high risk!!

Medmark really need to be questioned as to their purpose.

Treppen

Will Yam wrote: »

If someone has a medical condition which prevents them working they can get a doctors cert.

What did all the doctors, nurses, guards, supermarket staff, hairdressers who had serious medical conditions do?

Medmark have the final say.

I'd say by all means use your own doctors cert to stay safe at home.

But if medmark considers you fit for work then you'll be marked as AWOL (or whatever the term is). I don't know if you'd get paid etc.

I think of you go directly to your principal, they might be able to 'work around it'. That's what I could gather from our principal but I was trying to read between the lines as to what he was stressing e.g. "come to me first ASAP and we can try and sort it, cos we're allways very good at pitching in for each other" , he's very understanding on a human level. Maybe I got the wrong end of the stick.

Treppen

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Medmark really need to be questioned as to their purpose.

Every large company (especially the multinationals) have their own medics, but they'll always act in the interests of the company first , as long as they're absolved of litigation.

Medmark are following HPSC guidelines I assume!

shesty

I read that article --what is this "high risk" vs "very high risk"? Is that definition coming from a medical person, or is a criteria set by the Dept or a Union or something?

Because with all due respect I don't think the Dept or any teacher's union are qualified to decide what is ok for high risk vs very high risk.Surely once you are just plain high risk, that should be it and you should be taking extra precautions.

r93kaey5p2izun

shesty wrote: »

I read that article --what is this "high risk" vs "very high risk"? Is that definition coming from a medical person, or is a criteria set by the Dept or a Union or something?

Because with all due respect I don't think the Dept or any teacher's union are qualified to decide what is ok for high risk vs very high risk.Surely once you are just plain high risk, that should be it and you should be taking extra precautions.

It's a HSE definition.

https://www2.hse.ie/conditions/coronavirus/people-at-higher-risk.html

Will Yam

shesty wrote: »

I read that article --what is this "high risk" vs "very high risk"? Is that definition coming from a medical person, or is a criteria set by the Dept or a Union or something?

Because with all due respect I don't think the Dept or any teacher's union are qualified to decide what is ok for high risk vs very high risk.Surely once you are just plain high risk, that should be it and you should be taking extra precautions.

How did nurses, doctors, guards, hairdressers, waitresses, bus drivers deal with high risk and very high risk?

Teachers are among the last to return to work - surely to god they or their unions could check with the other sectors who have been working for months now?