Guess who is on quarantine AGAIN!

[Steve_R]

Originally Posted by aerovette

A coworker and her friend are dating two of the Houston Astros and during the season, they had two choices. Not see them the entire time, or be on lockdown with them the entire time. My coworker chose to not see him, the other girl went on lockdown with her boyfriend.

They would be benched for violating.

Apples and oranges. NBA players were sequestered and their wife/GF could choose to join them or not, but if they chose not to they didn't have to quarantine at home. Mick has to quarantine at home because someone at his wife's place of work might have COVID, which makes zero sense.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

In that case, would you mind taking a shift arguing with Doug?

No problem, but I haven't seen him around in at least a few days.

Originally Posted by Steve_R

Huh? You have to follow rules set by your wife's employer - who has no authority over you of any kind? Never heard of that, but it's a whole new world out there with companies and governments making huge power grabs and people meekly giving their approval.

Originally Posted by dvarapala

Perhaps if his wife wants to keep her job he's required to play along?

Originally Posted by aerovette

Q: How would they know?

A: They wouldn't.

Wear a purposeless mask and do what you want and go where you want.

Originally Posted by Steve_R

Perhaps. I've never heard of a person's continued employment depending on the employee's spouse obeying the employer's policies. That would be bizarre and not something I'd ever agree to.

All of the above are essentially true. Before being allowed in the bank on a given day, she has to fill out a "health assessment", if she passes, she goes. If she fails, she stays home. There are questions on there about the recent activities of spouses and other household members, such that if I were to go roaming around, she would either have to lie, or be out of the branch for a very long time, which could subject her to be among the next round of lay-offs. It really is as simple as that.

Originally Posted by dvarapala

Mick is the last person I would expect to knuckle under to such foolishness - he must be getting soft in his old age.

I don't view it as "going soft", I view it as "being smart".

Like I have been saying for months, there is no reason to hide under your bed for years on end. I'll probably go to the liquor store today, and do "contactless pick up". If we run short of groceries, the grocery store delivers for free. If I have been exposed, why would I go around potentially exposing others when the avoidance of it is incredibly easy?

This is the part you "fraidy cats" can't seem to understand. If you're healthy, and too afraid to leave your house, don't. This is 2021, not 1921, you can easily survive just fine without ever leaving your house. There is no reason to go around telling healthy people how to live their lives just because you are afraid.

[Aerovette]

I don't consider it a lie if it's none of your damn business.

[Steve_R]

Originally Posted by aerovette

I don't consider it a lie if it's none of your damn business.

This. SO MUCH this. It's none of their ****ing business what my family is doing, or where, or how, or when.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by aerovette

I don't consider it a lie if it's none of your damn business.

Originally Posted by Steve_R

This. SO MUCH this. It's none of their ****ing business what my family is doing, or where, or how, or when.

I see both sides of it, as I don't disagree with either of these statements. But from the bank's side, if one of their employees gets COVID, exposes their spouse, and said spouse attends an orgy every day for the next few weeks, that could come back to bite the bank. It's almost certainly not legal for the bank to REQUIRE me to quarantine, but following some common sense is always a good idea.

BTW: it won't be 5 days. When I wrote that last night, I thought they were still doing 14 day quarantines which they were doing back in April, mostly because tests were not readily available then. Now, if an employee is exposed, they have to wait at least 5 days, and then they can get a test. If the test is negative, it is back to work as usual. We still haven't heard when the exposure was exactly, but if it wasn't on Saturday, it will have been more than 5 days tomorrow morning, so we can go and get tested, and if negative, I will have hung around my house for ONE DAY, which like I said, will not negatively impact my life AT ALL. If the exposure was Saturday, we have to wait for Thursday, so it might be a whole two days IF we didn't get it.

If we are positive, I shouldn't be leaving the house anyway. No one thinks the whole response to this mess is stupider than I do, but asking me to stay home for a day and get a test because I was exposed sounds like the most sensible thing I have heard about COVID so far. I have no interest in infecting my friends or others I run across.

[Steve_R]

Originally Posted by Mick

If we are positive, I shouldn't be leaving the house anyway. No one thinks the whole response to this mess is stupider than I do, but asking me to stay home for a day and get a test because I was exposed sounds like the most sensible thing I have heard about COVID so far. I have no interest in infecting my friends or others I run across.

I agree with the "if you're positive part." However, just because your wife might have been exposed, the odds you were exposed is even lower. So, your wife's employer isn't asking you to stay home because you were exposed, they're asking you to stay home because there's a tiny chance you were exposed through her. Would they care if you were an hourly employee somewhere who can't work from home? I'm doubting they would.

We've gone insane, and logic and common sense have disappeared.

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by Mick

I see both sides of it, as I don't disagree with either of these statements. But from the bank's side, if one of their employees gets COVID, exposes their spouse, and said spouse attends an orgy every day for the next few weeks, that could come back to bite the bank. It's almost certainly not legal for the bank to REQUIRE me to quarantine, but following some common sense is always a good idea.

BTW: it won't be 5 days. When I wrote that last night, I thought they were still doing 14 day quarantines which they were doing back in April, mostly because tests were not readily available then. Now, if an employee is exposed, they have to wait at least 5 days, and then they can get a test. If the test is negative, it is back to work as usual. We still haven't heard when the exposure was exactly, but if it wasn't on Saturday, it will have been more than 5 days tomorrow morning, so we can go and get tested, and if negative, I will have hung around my house for ONE DAY, which like I said, will not negatively impact my life AT ALL. If the exposure was Saturday, we have to wait for Thursday, so it might be a whole two days IF we didn't get it.

If we are positive, I shouldn't be leaving the house anyway. No one thinks the whole response to this mess is stupider than I do, but asking me to stay home for a day and get a test because I was exposed sounds like the most sensible thing I have heard about COVID so far. I have no interest in infecting my friends or others I run across.

What a foolish way to run a business.

Sick? Stay home
Healthy? Come to work.

How inefficient to be sending people home, then back, then home, then back. The people caught in the shuffle aren't even sick !

[Mick]

Originally Posted by Steve_R

I agree with the "if you're positive part." However, just because your wife might have been exposed, the odds you were exposed is even lower. So, your wife's employer isn't asking you to stay home because you were exposed, they're asking you to stay home because there's a tiny chance you were exposed through her. Would they care if you were an hourly employee somewhere who can't work from home? I'm doubting they would.

We've gone insane, and logic and common sense have disappeared.

They are saying she WAS exposed. The question then becomes, was she infected? If yes, then I HAVE BEEN exposed, so I don't agree with "tiny chance".

I agree about what if I was plant worker, would I have to stay home from work. One of the things I have complained about the response is it all seems so random, like nothing has been thought through. if there is no exception for "essential" activities (I don't know the exact wording of the questions), then this would be another example.

Originally Posted by aerovette

What a foolish way to run a business.

Sick? Stay home
Healthy? Come to work.

How inefficient to be sending people home, then back, then home, then back. The people caught in the shuffle aren't even sick !

Well, first of all, the Sick = Stay home, Healthy = Go to work is how every business should operate at all times.

Secondly, the only reasons ridiculous stuff like this are happening is because we are lead to believe that this virus is extremely deadly (without co-morbidities, it statistically isn't very deadly at all), and that "asymptomatic spread" is a huge thing (it is a reality, but transmission like that is rather rare), and everyone is afraid of being labeled a "super-spreader" and getting sued. Several of our Country's biggest problems are on display there.

[JetMechZ16]

Originally Posted by Mick

No problem, but I haven't seen him around in at least a few days.


All of the above are essentially true. Before being allowed in the bank on a given day, she has to fill out a "health assessment", if she passes, she goes. If she fails, she stays home. There are questions on there about the recent activities of spouses and other household members, such that if I were to go roaming around, she would either have to lie, or be out of the branch for a very long time, which could subject her to be among the next round of lay-offs. It really is as simple as that.



I don't view it as "going soft", I view it as "being smart".

Like I have been saying for months, there is no reason to hide under your bed for years on end. I'll probably go to the liquor store today, and do "contactless pick up". If we run short of groceries, the grocery store delivers for free. If I have been exposed, why would I go around potentially exposing others when the avoidance of it is incredibly easy?

This is the part you "fraidy cats" can't seem to understand. If you're healthy, and too afraid to leave your house, don't. This is 2021, not 1921, you can easily survive just fine without ever leaving your house. There is no reason to go around telling healthy people how to live their lives just because you are afraid.

Is the bank denying entry to it's employees that have school age children?? Kids in school are exposed to god knows what.

My company expects certain behavior changes from me during this time. Let me just say that wasn't negotiated in with my pay so I comply only if I wish to. They've shown they are not complying with their own rules so neither will I. We have employees that have come down with it and according to them we should be tested and quarantined. Due to essential worker requirements we'd have to shut the plant down if we all quarantine, so they only send a few for testing if they are ok then they'll send the others. If not they don't send the rest and keep them working. They lost the entire compressor team to quarantine once and I doubt they'll let that happen again.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by JetMechZ16

Is the bank denying entry to it's employees that have school age children?? Kids in school are exposed to god knows what.

Our schools are closed, so at this time, this is not an issue.

My company expects certain behavior changes from me during this time. Let me just say that wasn't negotiated in with my pay so I comply only if I wish to. They've shown they are not complying with their own rules so neither will I. We have employees that have come down with it and according to them we should be tested and quarantined. Due to essential worker requirements we'd have to shut the plant down if we all quarantine, so they only send a few for testing if they are ok then they'll send the others. If not they don't send the rest and keep them working. They lost the entire compressor team to quarantine once and I doubt they'll let that happen again.

Just another example of rules being put in place without thinking them through first. There are thousands of such examples.

Putting company policies in place that aren't legally enforceable is nothing new in Corporate America. Because I received company stock as part of my compensation, I had to sign an agreement intended to prevent me from committing insider trading violations. The wording was hilarious, it said "You should consider yourself restricted . . . ". I discussed it with one of our lawyers once, and he admitted that it was illegal for them to attempt to prevent me from trading an asset, once I fully owned it (like, not restricted any more). BUT he did remind me that I can be fired for violating company policy, and the policy was clear that I was to contact the office of the Corporate Secretary before making any trades in company stock.

[Steve_R]

Originally Posted by Mick

Secondly, the only reasons ridiculous stuff like this are happening is because we are lead to believe that this virus is extremely deadly (without co-morbidities, it statistically isn't very deadly at all), and that "asymptomatic spread" is a huge thing (it is a reality, but transmission like that is rather rare), and everyone is afraid of being labeled a "super-spreader" and getting sued. Several of our Country's biggest problems are on display there.

Which is why I said this:

Originally Posted by Steve_R

We've gone insane, and logic and common sense have disappeared.

Way too many people are just sheep and refuse to think for themselves, and expect the government to provide for them and protect them. Idiots.

The majority of supposed COVID deaths are people who are already older than their expected life span, yet we're willing to destroy the economy to "slow the spread."

[Aerovette]

Pretty much anyone with a mind to, is taking advantage of this pandemic. Top to bottom.

[Bill]

Guess who is on quarantine AGAIN!
If you guessed "Mick", you're right.

I guessed Mick. When may I expect to receive my wood bowl for guessing correctly?

[Rodnok1]

Perhaps best practices will come from this cluster of quarantines and whatnot this time around and we'll know exactly what to expect the next round...

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by Rodnok1

Perhaps best practices will come from this cluster of quarantines and whatnot this time around and we'll know exactly what to expect the next round...

I know what to expect.

Joe Biden on January 21st will sign an EO for a Federal mask mandate.

EDIT: ANNNNNNNND, as a result, case numbers will fall through the floor. Death counts will drop, ICUs will return to normal, and people will begin to get the flu again.

Joebama - "If Trump had done this immediately, how many lives would have been saved?"

[Rodnok1]

Originally Posted by aerovette

I know what to expect.

Joe Biden on January 21st will sign an EO for a Federal mask mandate.

EDIT: ANNNNNNNND, as a result, case numbers will fall through the floor. Death counts will drop, ICUs will return to normal, and people will begin to get the flu again.

Joebama - "If Trump had done this immediately, how many lives would have been saved?"

Don't forget he'll take 100% credit for vacinnes and any effectiveness they have because ya know.. Orange man bad and all.

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by Steve_R

Apples and oranges. NBA players were sequestered and their wife/GF could choose to join them or not, but if they chose not to they didn't have to quarantine at home. Mick has to quarantine at home because someone at his wife's place of work might have COVID, which makes zero sense.

Point being MLB decided the behavior of two S/Os. Yes, they had an option, but still it was MLB dictating the options.

[dvarapala]

Originally Posted by aerovette

Pretty much anyone with a mind to, is taking advantage of this pandemic. Top to bottom.

If you consider "taking every opportunity to work from home in my underwear" to be taking advantage of the pandemic, then I'm guilty as charged.

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

If you consider "taking every opportunity to work from home in my underwear" to be taking advantage of the pandemic, then I'm guilty as charged.

Well, I'm essential so I have to come in to the office in my underwear.

[Bill]

Originally Posted by dvarapala

If you consider "taking every opportunity to work from home in my underwear" to be taking advantage of the pandemic, then I'm guilty as charged.

That's a less attractive option in the Winter.