3 ms·

In my company a staff member in a different office has tested positive. The ceo seems to be very careful to follow government advice. It's like they don't want

by 7952 7y ago

In my company a staff member in a different office has tested positive. The ceo seems to be very careful to follow government advice. It's like they don't want to be seen to under-react or over-react. This seems misguided when there are positive things you can do like encouraging people to work from home. If the cost is minimal then why not? It's like telling people to wash their hands or use a tissue.

antonzabirko 7y ago
Because that's how this society unfolded. Overreactions are seen as poor leadership and leaders are held by the public instead of the public wellbeing.
Spooky23 7y ago
The public health people know what they are talking about. For most people, frequently washing your hands is the only action required.
zdragnar 7y ago
Your CEO probably isn't a health care professional and doesn't want to promote or advise specific behavior that isn't in line with official recommendations. It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home. I know someone who would love to, but two autistic children under school age at home makes that essentially impossible.
- Polylactic_acid 7y ago
  Work from home doesn't have to literally mean home. You can set up a laptop in the library and work there. Fairly often they have tables and decent chairs with a power point available and you aren't expected to spend any money or get out of the way like in a cafe. Although I now realize this suggestion is entirely useless for avoiding sickness. Still useful if you want to work away from the office in normal conditions.
- pbourke 7y ago
  > It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home A WFH-if-able policy would benefit them as well, because fewer people would be at the office, reducing their risk of coming in contact with the disease.
geofft 7y ago
Telling people to work from home isn't necessarily of benefit if they're still out and about in the evenings, and most people don't have a few weeks of food stocked at home. If the cost is minimal but so is the benefit, there's not much point - your CEO may as well tell everyone to eat oranges and get enough vitamin C on "why not" grounds. Saying "Prepare to not leave your house at all for two weeks, and we'll give you a couple days off to prepare but get on the VPN once you've quarantined yourself" would be of much more benefit, but it's much more disruptive.
- eli 7y ago
  Yeah but it decreases the odds of a whole office getting sick at once, which seems like worst case
- catlas3r 7y ago
  The employer has no legal way to mandate that. That said, if it were consistent with generally accepted recommendations from the government, and my employer was not just allowing but encouraging that recommendation, I probably would comply voluntarily.

by 7952 7y ago

antonzabirko 7y ago

Because that's how this society unfolded. Overreactions are seen as poor leadership and leaders are held by the public instead of the public wellbeing.

Spooky23 7y ago

The public health people know what they are talking about. For most people, frequently washing your hands is the only action required.

zdragnar 7y ago

Your CEO probably isn't a health care professional and doesn't want to promote or advise specific behavior that isn't in line with official recommendations. It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home. I know someone who would love to, but two autistic children under school age at home makes that essentially impossible.

Polylactic_acid 7y ago
Work from home doesn't have to literally mean home. You can set up a laptop in the library and work there. Fairly often they have tables and decent chairs with a power point available and you aren't expected to spend any money or get out of the way like in a cafe. Although I now realize this suggestion is entirely useless for avoiding sickness. Still useful if you want to work away from the office in normal conditions.
pbourke 7y ago
> It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home A WFH-if-able policy would benefit them as well, because fewer people would be at the office, reducing their risk of coming in contact with the disease.

geofft 7y ago

Telling people to work from home isn't necessarily of benefit if they're still out and about in the evenings, and most people don't have a few weeks of food stocked at home. If the cost is minimal but so is the benefit, there's not much point - your CEO may as well tell everyone to eat oranges and get enough vitamin C on "why not" grounds. Saying "Prepare to not leave your house at all for two weeks, and we'll give you a couple days off to prepare but get on the VPN once you've quarantined yourself" would be of much more benefit, but it's much more disruptive.

eli 7y ago
Yeah but it decreases the odds of a whole office getting sick at once, which seems like worst case
catlas3r 7y ago
The employer has no legal way to mandate that. That said, if it were consistent with generally accepted recommendations from the government, and my employer was not just allowing but encouraging that recommendation, I probably would comply voluntarily.