Schools closed until February? (part 3)

irishblessing

Gorey Community school, reportedly 15 positive student cases and 4 staff cases.

ruwithme

CruelSummer wrote: »

Be careful with your positivity on here, they all want to get schools closed ASAP in the interest of theirs and their pupil's/children's 'safety'. Funny how some posters on this thread claim to be teachers. They've an awful lot of time for boards posts if they are, and not a lot for teaching the students they claim to be so concerned for.

Good post, a little bit of needle should help keep them honest, cruelsummer

History Queen

irishblessing wrote: »

Gorey Community school, reportedly 15 positive student cases and 4 staff cases.

Where did you hear this, is it in the media? Worrying time for all involved.

wirelessdude01

History Queen wrote: »

Where did you hear this, is it in the media? Worrying time for all involved.

Assuming it's on the Facebook group. They had 11 confirmed cases earlier in the week.

khalessi

irishblessing wrote: »

Gorey Community school, reportedly 15 positive student cases and 4 staff cases.

They had cases a few weeks ago

History Queen

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Assuming it's on the Facebook group. They had 11 confirmed cases earlier in the week.

Ah ok. I'm not on Facebook. Was talking to colleagues today, they're drained from the residual stress of the sitiation and the strain of keeping positive in front of the kids. I really hope this 6 week stint at level 5 brings some results.

irishblessing

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Assuming it's on the Facebook group. They had 11 confirmed cases earlier in the week.

Yep. Here's a link to the earlier cases, I'll see if I can find one on the ones announced today. Probably a bit early yet for media article.

https://wexfordweekly.com/2020/10/16/covid-outbreak-gorey-community-cluster-2/

Helgagirl

I am a parent and I personally am very glad that we are at midterm and that the school is closed. From March I could control my teenagers movements and only do what I felt was safe. Since school has reopened I have had to trust that he is in a safe environment when he goes to school. I have no complaint with his school or teachers as they are trying their best to keep working in what I would feel must be a very stressful environment. The teachers are not in control of the getting in and coming home part. On 29th September there was a positive case in his school. The school can't notify even what class was affected. It turns out that it was a boy in my son's class( which of course everyone will find out through the grapevine.) My son wasn't considered a close contact despite spending his days in the same classroom. And I don't particularly want him to have to go for a Covid test unless it is absolutely necessary. He came home from school on Monday complaining of feeling sick. He had a headache and sick stomach. Okay this doesn't sound like Covid, but the worry is there straight away. There was another email sent yesterday of another case in his school, but because he has been home sick we haven't heard from what class. Both cases have been described as community transmission, but how can this virus only be perceived as being transferred in the community and not in school doesn't make sense to me.
Now today there is the talk of the hand sanitiser which can cause the type of symptoms my son is complaining about, so again there is a worry has this affected my son. His school has said they don't use that sanitiser, so more than likely he just has some bug and will be ok in a few days, but prior to Covid, I would have just got on with taking care of him, bringing him meals while he is in bed etc, but now there is always that niggling worry. It's a balance of trying to protect my family and trying to have some bit of normality.

eagle eye

[quote=CruelSummer At the moment it isn’t, and vulnerable/at risk groups should be protecting themselves while cases are high.[/quote]
What about vulnerable parents?
What about vulnerable grandparents who have given their homes to their kids who now have children in school?

wirelessdude01

eagle eye wrote: »

What about vulnerable parents?
What about vulnerable grandparents who have given their homes to their kids who now have children in school?

As discussed last night these people aren't considered by the government or the various bodies as being important and thus that leaves the people involved with a decision to make. Send the children to school, keep the child at home(without any support being allowed to be forthcoming from the school by edict of the DoE), formally homeschooling the children and take them off the school register.

selectamatic

Jucifer wrote: »

So the sanitiser being recalled, the one with methanol instead of ethanol, was provided to children in your school? Despite the instruction that children only be provided alcohol free sanitiser?

The instructions are/were that "young" children should not have "independent" use of alcohol based gels. Once supervised the use of alcohol gels is/was encouraged in situations where continuous hand washing wasn't practical/feasible.

The departments take on "young" appears to be JI-2nd class.

The instructions weren't children only be provided alcohol free sanitiser as you claim.

It was also recommended that young children not bring their own sanitiser into school.

Alcohol free sanitisers are widely accepted as being effectively useless in combating covid.

eagle eye

wirelessdude01 wrote:

As discussed last night these people aren't considered by the government or the various bodies as being important and thus that leaves the people involved with a decision to make. Send the children to school, keep the child at home(without any support being allowed to be forthcoming from the school by edict of the DoE), formally homeschooling the children and take them off the school register.

And there's where our government, department of education and the HSE show how hopeless they are.

wirelessdude01

eagle eye wrote: »

And there's where our government, department of education and the HSE show how hopeless they are.

Agreed. Also doesn't change the fact that as things stand you/they have a choice to make regarding sending the children you refer to to school.

No school would be stupid enough to give a guarantee that students that attend are safe from covid infection.

Thats me

selectamatic wrote: »

Alcohol free sanitisers are widely accepted as being effectively useless in combating covid.

Sanitisers are less significant issue.. They do not prepend inhaling viruses in closed space, nobody claimed irritation from methanol here yet, why the hell we are discussing this minor issue?

Higgins5473

Thats me wrote: »

Sanitisers are less significant issue.. They do not prepend inhaling viruses in closed space, nobody claimed irritation from methanol here yet, why the hell we are discussing this minor issue?

Spot on, non issue. Professor on news talk earlier said unless they were drinking copious amounts of it which can cause blindness it’s just the same cheap **** we get in various forms and sizes which we consider bargains.

Yep it’s cheap toxic ****e, and so is the Irish media

selectamatic

Thats me wrote: »

Sanitisers are less significant issue.. They do not prepend inhaling viruses in closed space, nobody claimed irritation from methanol here yet, why the hell we are discussing this minor issue?

Ya it is pretty much a non issue to be honest but if a poster appears to be posting incorrect statements and in doing so is trying to apportion blame to schools for this situation they should be pulled up on it.

byhookorbycrook

Schools were told there would be “ enhanced protection/measures “ at level 5 , yet nothing has been issued . Parents , please be aware of this .

zeebre12

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Some schools who do book rental are disinclined to let books “ stay home .” In our school , each teacher has sent a week’s work home over the last few days , as advised by the body that manages primary schools .

Schools are not going to close at all as Tony stated tonight on the The Late Late Show. If there was any inkling of schools closing surely he would have said something at this stage. He is very definite and not much really will change in a week.

wirelessdude01

zeebre12 wrote: »

Schools are not going to close at all as Tony stated tonight on the The Late Late Show. If there was any inkling of schools closing surely he would have said something at this stage. He is very definite and not much really will change in a week.

Look on the 10th of March we were told schools wouldn't be closing, what happened on the 12th?

They aren't going to flag this if it is going to occur. It'll be like like the last time and sprung on us.

duffysfarm

Dont know if this is correct thread to ask question but here goes . I have kid in local national school. Got email from school to say child in his class tested positive monday of last week (5 October). There were no instructions as to what to do with child at this stage from school or hse. my kid went in on tuesday and class was sent home tuesday morning by hse. Class was tested on Wednesday and results on Thursday and there was one more positive case. Got an email today from school with copy of letter from hse to say my kid will have to have a second test due to a health risk assessment. If he has test next Tuesday lets say, according to the hse website he has to isolate for 10 days even if nagative. Is that correct? Also it would seem mad to test him next week when it would have been more than 14 days since he was in school and contact with a positive case at school. Also if we don't test him can the school refuse him entry on Monday week after mid term?

Thats me

selectamatic wrote: »

Ya it is pretty much a non issue to be honest but if a poster appears to be posting incorrect statements and in doing so is trying to apportion blame to schools for this situation they should be pulled up on it.

In given circumstances there is no reason to consider that sanitiser at all. It is just incomparable issues - someone could potentially feel some irritation from sanitiser (or what is true reason? was it ever disclosed?) and spreading COVID trough the schools which were still opened during Level 5. I would not be surprised if this recall of sanitiser by _unknown reason_ is the effort to divert attention from main issue. We saw here bots posting non-relevant "responses" recently in this thread, we see this widely promoted sanitizergate issue. All of this is to hide the main issue - there is no sane reasons to keep schools open during Level 5. Why? Few idiots decided this will help to exploit homeworkers more effectively.

blanch152

duffysfarm wrote: »

Dont know if this is correct thread to ask question but here goes . I have kid in local national school. Got email from school to say child in his class tested positive monday of last week (5 October). There were no instructions as to what to do with child at this stage from school or hse. my kid went in on tuesday and class was sent home tuesday morning by hse. Class was tested on Wednesday and results on Thursday and there was one more positive case. Got an email today from school with copy of letter from hse to say my kid will have to have a second test due to a health risk assessment. If he has test next Tuesday lets say, according to the hse website he has to isolate for 10 days even if nagative. Is that correct? Also it would seem mad to test him next week when it would have been more than 14 days since he was in school and contact with a positive case at school. Also if we don't test him can the school refuse him entry on Monday week after mid term?

Does the school have a return to school form?

Should have been introduced under the guidelines.

blanch152

Thats me wrote: »

In given circumstances there is no reason to consider that sanitiser at all. It is just incomparable issues - someone could potentially feel some irritation from sanitiser (or what is true reason? was it ever disclosed?) and spreading COVID trough the schools which were still opened during Level 5. I would not be surprised if this recall of sanitiser by _unknown reason_ is the effort to divert attention from main issue. We saw here bots posting non-relevant "responses" recently in this thread, we see this widely promoted sanitizergate issue. All of this is to hide the main issue - there is no sane reasons to keep schools open during Level 5. Why? Few idiots decided this will help to exploit homeworkers more effectively.

Yes, there is plenty of reason to keep schools open. Education is a vital and essential service. So long as schools are not promoters of transmission, they are relatively low-risk environments.

Thats me

duffysfarm wrote: »

Dont know if this is correct thread to ask question but here goes . I have kid in local national school. Got email from school to say child in his class tested positive monday of last week (5 October). There were no instructions as to what to do with child at this stage from school or hse. my kid went in on tuesday and class was sent home tuesday morning by hse. Class was tested on Wednesday and results on Thursday and there was one more positive case. Got an email today from school with copy of letter from hse to say my kid will have to have a second test due to a health risk assessment. If he has test next Tuesday lets say, according to the hse website he has to isolate for 10 days even if nagative. Is that correct? Also it would seem mad to test him next week when it would have been more than 14 days since he was in school and contact with a positive case at school. Also if we don't test him can the school refuse him entry on Monday week after mid term?

I cannot say anything about legal side of the question, but second test is good idea. If it happen to be positive case - it is better to stop it on earlier stage. In the child COVID is low risk, but it is. Do your best to protect them.



Also, I _hope_ there will no entries after mid-term until L5 revoked.

Thats me

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, there is plenty of reason to keep schools open. Education is a vital and essential service. So long as schools are not promoters of transmission, they are relatively low-risk environments.

Just LOL :cool:

Smacruairi

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, there is plenty of reason to keep schools open. Education is a vital and essential service. So long as schools are not promoters of transmission, they are relatively low-risk environments.

https://www.tes.com/news/schools-linked-large-increase-covid-r-number

You couldn't interpret the article correctly the first time, maybe you might be OK the second time around.

"The reopening of schools was associated with a "large" increase in the R number, according to new research published in the Lancet"

"The researchers also said that some of the greatest effects on R were seen for measures that were more easily implementable by law, like school reopening and introduction of a public events ban".

Thats me

Smacruairi wrote: »

https://www.tes.com/news/schools-linked-large-increase-covid-r-number

You couldn't interpret the article correctly the first time, maybe you might be OK the second time around.

"The reopening of schools was associated with a "large" increase in the R number, according to new research published in the Lancet"

"The researchers also said that some of the greatest effects on R were seen for measures that were more easily implementable by law, like school reopening and introduction of a public events ban".

I think you are feeding a troll..

Smacruairi

Thats me wrote: »

I think you are feeding a troll..

Perhaps, but a troll supported by several others I have dissected in their opinions. I find it handy to keep the really easy rebuttals close to the top of the page.

Like this chancer who Lancet has disproven. Like the time Lillyfae suggested classes be held outside in the rain then tried to back track. Like the time raind suggested Dublin was under control in level 3, then go tobann a massive increase and the highest numbers ever. Like thst bloke who had a fetish for marquees but couldn't design a classroom that contained kids who were 3 dimensional etc.

Thats me

Smacruairi wrote: »

Perhaps, but a troll supported by several others I have dissected in their opinions. I find it handy to keep the really easy rebuttals close to the top of the page.

Good idea!

wirelessdude01

Smacruairi wrote: »

Perhaps, but a troll supported by several others I have dissected in their opinions. I find it handy to keep the really easy rebuttals close to the top of the page.

Like this chancer who Lancet has disproven. Like the time Lillyfae suggested classes be held outside in the rain then tried to back track. Like the time raind suggested Dublin was under control in level 3, then go tobann a massive increase and the highest numbers ever. Like thst bloke who had a fetish for marquees but couldn't design a classroom that contained kids who were 3 dimensional etc.

Ahh the good old days.....

Smacruairi

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Ahh the good old days.....

Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in. Its good trolling if it is trolling, to be fair!

Thats me

Smacruairi wrote: »

Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in. Its good trolling if it is trolling, to be fair!

Good trolling is no trolling. Good troll is dead troll. This thread is read by 137343 readers. If all of us spent only 1 second to read the single bull..it post - it costs 2289.05 minutes or 38.15 hours of human life in total.

Jucifer

selectamatic wrote: »

The instructions are/were that "young" children should not have "independent" use of alcohol based gels. Once supervised the use of alcohol gels is/was encouraged in situations where continuous hand washing wasn't practical/feasible.

The departments take on "young" appears to be JI-2nd class.

The instructions weren't children only be provided alcohol free sanitiser as you claim.

It was also recommended that young children not bring their own sanitiser into school.

Alcohol free sanitisers are widely accepted as being effectively useless in combating covid.

Fair enough. Apologies for misinformation. I am not a teacher and was going on knowledge of how one school applied the instructions. I will refrain from making uninformed commentary in future.

Thats me

Jucifer wrote: »

I will refrain from making uninformed commentary in future.

Please _do_ uninformed commentary. Everybody understand this is is a picture what you see from your position. But we will have no complete picture with no individual comments.

Jucifer

selectamatic wrote: »

Ya it is pretty much a non issue to be honest but if a poster appears to be posting incorrect statements and in doing so is trying to apportion blame to schools for this situation they should be pulled up on it.

Sorry I replied to your earlier post just now before seeing this one. I was not trying to apportion blame on schools at all. My point was that I thought students would not be affected at all because I mistakenly thought that the sanitiser was only for use by teachers. I admit I am likely incorrect but you are misrepresenting my point.

Thats me

Jucifer wrote: »

Sorry I replied to your earlier post just now before seeing this one. I was not trying to apportion blame on schools at all. My point was that I thought students would not be affected at all because I mistakenly thought that the sanitiser was only for use by teachers. I admit I am likely incorrect but you are misrepresenting my point.

Who cares about hand sanitiser when this plague is spread by air... :pac:

political analyst

This is the interview with Tony Holohan on the Late Late Show. As of now, it is available on the Player for 30 days.

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/the-late-late-show/SI0000001694?extraguid=PI000016213

17 minutes and 30 seconds into this recording of the interview, Holohan said he doesn't envisage schools staying closed after this mid-term break. He said the cases that have arisen in schools involved the virus being brought in by some pupils - as opposed to a school being the point-of-origin of an outbreak - and that close contacts of those pupils in schools are less likely to be infected than close contacts of those pupils in the community. Presumably, the wearing of masks, sufficient air-conditioning, the use of hand-sanitisers and the use of school discipline mean that Covid clusters are much less likely to occur in schools than in the community.

selectamatic

Jucifer wrote: »

Fair enough. Apologies for misinformation. I am not a teacher and was going on knowledge of how one school applied the instructions. I will refrain from making uninformed commentary in future.

Jucifer wrote: »

Sorry I replied to your earlier post just now before seeing this one. I was not trying to apportion blame on schools at all. My point was that I thought students would not be affected at all because I mistakenly thought that the sanitiser was only for use by teachers. I admit I am likely incorrect but you are misrepresenting my point.

It did kinda read like blame was being put on the school but since that wasn't your intention I am very sorry for making a big deal out of it. Nearly anytime I post here I'm on the defensive I'll try and keep things more civil in future. The fact you've accepted a mistake speaks volumes for ya as a poster.

Apologies for being so abrupt initially.

utmbuilder

The teachers have gotten no support they are the heroes with nurses in this Teachers in secondary should of been given 2 air purifiers to a room, breaks to change masks or to breath clearly outdoors. Along with smaller classes.

15 minute testing surely is developed at this stage.

The government being able to force us to send teachers and our children into such an area of risk day after day is really dangerous territory to be in.

Icyseanfitz

political analyst wrote: »

This is the interview with Tony Holohan on the Late Late Show. As of now, it is available on the Player for 30 days.

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/the-late-late-show/SI0000001694?extraguid=PI000016213

17 minutes and 30 seconds into this recording of the interview, Holohan said he doesn't envisage schools staying closed after this mid-term break. He said the cases that have arisen in schools involved the virus being brought in by some pupils - as opposed to a school being the point-of-origin of an outbreak - and that close contacts of those pupils in schools are less likely to be infected than close contacts of those pupils in the community. Presumably, the wearing of masks, sufficient air-conditioning, the use of hand-sanitisers and the use of school discipline mean that Covid clusters are much less likely to occur in schools than in the community.

Isn't it amazing how our government and nphet seem to have an absolutely unshakable and unquestionable faith that schools are and will stay 100% safe, with a virus we know very little about. Poor kids are guinea pigs at this stage.

MelbourneMan

utmbuilder wrote: »

The teachers have gotten no support they are the heroes with nurses in this Teachers in secondary should of been given 2 air purifiers to a room, breaks to change masks or to breath clearly outdoors. Along with smaller classes.

15 minute testing surely is developed at this stage.

The government being able to force us to send teachers and our children into such an area of risk day after day is really dangerous territory to be in.

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

byhookorbycrook

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

Is that you Leo? The govt is NOT sympathetic. The govt. knew about the hand san issue on Tuesday and emailed school principals at 10.30 on Thursday night , saying that the school could close the following morning .
They willingly deny aerosol transmission and keep pushing the “ schools are safe “ mantra .

Boggles

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

Norma?

khalessi

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

Incorrect

irishblessing

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Schools were told there would be “ enhanced protection/measures “ at level 5 , yet nothing has been issued . Parents , please be aware of this .

Why would they say that, if according to Tony Holohan, the below is already true.
It doesn't make any sense and they expect us to swallow that?

political analyst wrote: »

This is the interview with Tony Holohan on the Late Late Show. As of now, it is available on the Player for 30 days.

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/the-late-late-show/SI0000001694?extraguid=PI000016213

17 minutes and 30 seconds into this recording of the interview, Holohan said he doesn't envisage schools staying closed after this mid-term break. He said the cases that have arisen in schools involved the virus being brought in by some pupils - as opposed to a school being the point-of-origin of an outbreak - and that close contacts of those pupils in schools are less likely to be infected than close contacts of those pupils in the community. Presumably, the wearing of masks, sufficient air-conditioning, the use of hand-sanitisers and the use of school discipline mean that Covid clusters are much less likely to occur in schools than in the community.

So at least 30 cases in one school alone in Gorey but it's not a point-of-origin outbreak? Okay.....

8k71ps

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

It is not the fault of the unions for bringing teachers back with no support, schools with broken contact tracing and students without remote learning. Obviously the unions aren't particularly great but blaming them for all of this is absolutely ridiculous. It's the government and state that ought to be blamed.

irishblessing

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

Could you stir the shít any harder? None of that is true.

wirelessdude01

MelbourneMan wrote: »

The lack of support for teachers is an unfortunate consequence of their past attitudes and actions, and presents a very particular problem in the context of engagement and handling this difficult virus situation.

The teachers unions, without getting into the argument of whether it is true today or not - the reality is that they have painted themselves into a corner of being regarded as militant, unreasonable, and exploitative of any situation - are sadly in a position of having no credibility of being capable of engaging for the greater good of students, society, and even their own safety.

This makes it very difficult both for the departments of education, health, the government to have constructive dialogue with teachers, and, for any wider sympathy for the difficulties of teaching with the current risks. The good efforts and concerns raised by by many genuinely well motivated teachers and principals is lost in this context, and their voices muted through the problematic structures of their unions.

The government is very sympathetic to the complexities the current policy of maintaining open schools presents, but is hamstrung by the disfunctional structures and legacies of these unions, and sub-optimal outcomes in handling the corona issues on this front now result.

This reads like a government press release. We don't like you so we'll make everyone in school community suffer to appease some perceived distant slight. Parents please be aware that this possibly is the attitude of the department/government.

irishblessing

Ha, if you've got a few minutes to amuse yourself this morning, go back and look at Melbourne Man's previous posts on this site. They read like a government official. Lol. He seems to be referring to himself as "we" in a few places when referencing government policy. Wow....

irishblessing

Check out this response from MelbourneMan on the 11th of Oct:

Originally Posted by Ginger n Lemon View Post
You know, there is a chance that virus spreads in the households and indeed not restaurants or pubs. In light of this, keeping restaurants opened would actually reduce the spread.

I am an authority on this matter.

A lot of people are making the mistake of simplifying transmission to a single stage. To understand the various contributions of the various societal interractions for virus transmission, the household ones must effectively be excluded.

In practice, they cannot be stopped. Intrahoushold isolation is effectively impossible. And transmission must be understood as a two stage process - transmission outside the household, and then within it. Taken in isolation, any single external interface - pubs, worksplace, schools, shops, etc, have an ostensibly low transmission rate. Giving those who dont really understand what they are talking about, seemingly statisitical justification for their contention thant environment X is hardly at all contributing to the propagation. They state pubs arent, international travel isnt, schools arent, small crowds at sports fixtures arent, etc. But the reality is that they are. And why the non essential - unfortunately therefore the fun things in life - must be shutdown. Its mistaken to regard a single transmission in a sports club as insignificantly small in the overall view. But that single external transmission propagates to 2-6 cases in the home. Then just one of them in an external case of the workplace or visiting of another home. And so on

We cannot close down homes. The chain of transmission must be broken outside it.





Then to speak about our teachers like that? WTF.