Workplaces and employer attitudes Megathread

So good and bad news...

Good news: I was sent home from work last night

Bad news part 1: my workplace is still open and acting as though nothing is going on as far as production is concerned (no slowdown and we are by no means essential)

Bad news part 2: I have been requesting to my manager that I want to work from home for over a week, and made him aware that I live with family who are considered high risk. Last night when a colleague came in, worked close to me for 90 minutes, then told me his wife works in the HSE and is now waiting for a test because she developed a cough and tight chest two days earlier. He was sent home. I fairly lost it at this point, and my manager sent me home, not because I'm capable of working from home (which I am, this was ability was set up last week), but because he now felt my stress and anxiety levels were at a point that I might make mistakes and pose a risk to myself in the workplace, then in the same breath asked would I work the rest of the night shift from home... of course I said no.

Bad news part 3: The factory I work in still has hundred of people per day coming to work, sharing canteens, and I have observed numerous people coughing into hands before handling cups, opening doors, etc... A mail came out from a corporate level telling us how we're all doing a great job keeping production going with minimal impact, and said

“if you are unable to conduct your work in a manner that maintains a two meter/six feet distance between you and your co-worker, and your close proximity work lasts more than 30 minutes, then talk to your supervisor about what can be done”

which to me suggests they are telling employees that ignoring HSE guidelines is grand! 29 minutes breathing on each other while working in cramped areas is no bother, 30 is where it gets dodgy...

There needs to be a way to report businesses that are staying open and claiming to be following guidelines, when people in them on the floor can clearly see this is not the case! I know for certain that my workplace wouldn't dream of stopping unless ordered too, there hasn't even been mention to workers about contingency plans for when people are inevitability getting sick. For the record we've already had one confirmed case on site.

So far I've kind of won, I'm off site and working from home from next week (taking a break this week, normally I'd try get a Doc's note for stress, but I'm not taking up their time at the moment) , but when eventually this all calms down they can be damn sure I'll be fighting to make sure it's recorded that I was sent home for the wrong reason, and that their inaction and lack of understanding of my family situation caused the stress and distraction that they then felt was unsafe.

/rant over

No specific advice for your job potentially letting you go but I urge you to follow public health guidance as self-isolate if you're symptomatic. No one wants to establish another cluster.

I know your concerns about your job are very real but so is the risk of death for many if clusters keep popping up across the nation. If an employer lets you go for not taking a deadly virus into the work place, are they the kind of employer you would want to work for long term?

DOH has a guide for accessing money via Dept. of Social protection if you need it. Be clever, be responsible, stay safe and get well soon.

rapul wrote: »

Thanks for the reply, I'm aware how serious this is alrite, I'm going to ring my gp when they are open and see, just wondering on the work side is all. I won't be going in today anyway unless the gp says it's ok.

Is the new job in the public service?

I shouldn't be working but I am. My job isn't essential but 'nice to be have'. Since I started this post, I've volunteered a week of my holidays. I'm taking next week off (using my holidays) just because I have the holidays to take, and I've no plans for real holidays.

tdf7187 wrote: »

By what possible standard is the lottery an essential service? I'm thinking of their staff who are presumably being forced to continue working.

I would also question how off licences are deemed essential, if they are deemed to be under the heading of beverages.

Foweva Awone wrote: »

If off-licenses were suddenly closed, many alcoholics would almost certainly need to be hospitalised to treat their withdrawal symptoms - it is extremely dangerous for a heavy drinker to stop suddenly without medical supervision and intervention. That's hardly what hospitals need right now, even more emergency beds being taken up by people detoxing.

Yep. Normal drinkers dont get that though and in general have no sympathy for the alcoholic. You can die from withdrawal symptoms, unlike with most illegal drugs. it is rare but it does happen.

tdf7187 wrote: »

Yep. Normal drinkers dont get that though and in general have no sympathy for the alcoholic. You can die from withdrawal symptoms, unlike with most illegal drugs. it is rare but it does happen.

Whether you have sympathy or not the hospitals don't need that burden. Looking after alcoholics in withdrawal can be very difficult and time consuming when they start getting shaky, aggitated, hallucinating etc.

I’m finding employers are using “angles” to maintain its normal business .

Being essential service is flouted especially where for example in one company I know a significantly small part of their business is insurance . They then deemed all the workers related to the significant business all have to come in also .when in reality it is only one one or two people who deal with the insurance part .

In another business they are using essential services to maintain normal business that includes travel country wide to maintain equipment in companies such as soft drinks, a college research group, a research group with farming related activities . What I’m saying it should be essential services to support infrastructure to support the fight against this pandemic .

I’m pretty sure if the op was asked to support only the Irish water part of the business and travel only when absolutely necessary then it would be acceptable .

kerryjack wrote: »

Son works for a civil engineering company that does work for Irish water, its business as usual in the morning his told, I would prefer if he stayed at home for 2 weeks what ye think.

Its his choice, he can take annual leave for the next two weeks.
Am i right in thinking you or he wants to isolate for 2 weeks and be paid also? Of thats the case tell him to tale PTO.

homewardbound11 wrote: »

I’m finding employers are using “angles” to maintain its normal business .

Being essential service is flouted especially where for example in one company I know a significantly small part of their business is insurance . They then deemed all the workers related to the significant business all have to come in also .when in reality it is only one one or two people who deal with the insurance part .

In another business they are using essential services to maintain normal business that includes travel country wide to maintain equipment in companies such as soft drinks, a college research group, a research group with farming related activities . What I’m saying it should be essential services to support infrastructure to support the fight against this pandemic .

I’m pretty sure if the op was asked to support only the Irish water part of the business and travel only when absolutely necessary then it would be acceptable .

Yep, agree with what you're saying. Far too many large and small businesses using the vague list to decide their profits are essential over employee health. Only a matter of time before the choice is taken from them as their workforce gets sick...