Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Gaz]

1 hour ago, superbigal said:

Going back to March 2020. My company works in a university owned building. The university literally jumped overboard like on the titanic.
Did not see a cleaner for weeks as work in the real world continued.
They came out of hiding after about 2 months to enter our building and put some signs up, tape down and install hand sanitisers with no sanitiser.
I think they have behaved in general in more fear than GPs, and that is saying something.
The staff loved it because they were mainly furloughed but upped to full 100% pay.
Before the recent rule changes around contacts being able to work after a test. The university would send anyone home for 10 days who was anywhere near a covid case. Again lovely 100% pay so the staff loved it.
The unis should not plead poverty ever again.

I don't know anyone working in further or higher education who was furloughed. Everyone was working from home.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

I don’t really have any evidential basis for saying this but it seems to me that the return to normality is staggered depending on industry.

I remember during the March-April lockdown going past the builder merchants in Wester Hailes and it was literally queued out the door with tradesmen and builders.  These guys have probably worked as normal pretty much 100% of the time.

where i work they sent all office workers to WFH in march 2020 , then for the following 18 months did next to f**k all except pay mere lip service to covid guidelines for those of us who had to be there in person, now that the office workers are coming back en mass  they have been busy implementing " enhanced covid safety measures" to help everyone ( folk who've been working from home all this time) feel safe & secure on their return to the workplace 

similar thing happens every new year, we usually get an email "welcoming back" everyone after the christmas break and hoping that everyone had a lovely break, never a mention of us (about 50% of permanent staff)  who are out working christmas day etc 

The article someone posted about home workers living in a wee bubble assuming everyone else is in the same boat as them is spot on for where i work

Edited September 22, 2021 by effeffsee_the2nd

[Honest_Man#1]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

 

I'm not sure exactly what type of university building you work in, but very few university staff have been furloughed over the pandemic - it has mainly only been people whose personal circumstances didn't allow them to work from home and people whose jobs were non-essential but couldn't be done from home. From March-May 2020, everyone who could was asked to work from home, that was literally the government advice, so I'm not sure what your imaginary "real world" consisted of here.

Part of my job involves University accommodation and it was a similar experience for me with large numbers of the University staff (cleaners, supervisors etc) mostly furloughed with cleaning regimes reduced right down to absolute bare minimum. I think comments like your one and Gaz’ are maybe regarding teaching/office staff who went to WFH, but that accounts for only a section of University staff. It is certainly not “very few” of the overall University staff who were furloughed.

[101]

1 hour ago, mizfit said:

Email went out from my work last Monday declaring English based colleagues would be returning to the office for a minimal of 3 days.

Shit has hit the fan.

Saves going bankrupt trying to run your gas central heating I guess

[Gaz]

4 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Part of my job involves University accommodation and it was a similar experience for me with large numbers of the University staff (cleaners, supervisors etc) mostly furloughed with cleaning regimes reduced right down to absolute bare minimum. I think comments like your one and Gaz’ are maybe regarding teaching/office staff who went to WFH, but that accounts for only a section of University staff. It is certainly not “very few” of the overall University staff who were furloughed.

That's a fair point. Most of my friends are in the teaching / lecturing side. Hadn't even considered custodial staff but now I think about it my school would have been the same.

[superbigal]

 
I'm not sure exactly what type of university building you work in, but very few university staff have been furloughed over the pandemic - it has mainly only been people whose personal circumstances didn't allow them to work from home and people whose jobs were non-essential but couldn't be done from home. From March-May 2020, everyone who could was asked to work from home, that was literally the government advice, so I'm not sure what your imaginary "real world" consisted of here.

Most of my interaction is with estates management. They were not working from home.

As I see honestman has just posted.

Cleaner not seen for weeks.
Grass cut I think not.
Security staff huddled in some secret bunker.


All the sports centre staff were also furloughed.

[vikingTON]

Well if the sports centre staff were furloughed then that clinches the argument that universities are a bunch of disinterested chancers. Clearly they should have been brought in to sit in a facility that wasn't being used, or perhaps repurposed for paramedic duty instead,

[superbigal]

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

Well if the sports centre staff were furloughed then that clinches the argument that universities are a bunch of disinterested chancers. Clearly they should have been brought in to sit in a facility that wasn't being used, or perhaps repurposed for paramedic duty instead,

Cleaners, Building maintenance, Security staff etc should not have been sooking the furlough nipple.

There were plenty people using the facilities.

 

I am only pointing out the sport centre staff were also furloughed (rightly).  

Thanks for your input as ever 

Edited September 22, 2021 by superbigal

[DeeTillEhDeh]

1) 'Masks' are not the same as keeping a grotty unwashed 'face covering' around for four months at a time, which has been actual practice in the UK.
2) China's success has got much more to do with welding infected folk into their apartment blocks than making them wear a mask. 
3) The face covering requirement has completely failed to stop three additional waves in Scotland, while the reckless Tory decision to bin that requirement resulted in no such recent wave.
4) None of this fucking matters anyway because we are falling over stacks of highly effective vaccines. 

Mask wearing was pointless as soon as they gave fatties and the "ahv got asthma" drama queens self diagnosed exemptions.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

14 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

13 hours ago, virginton said:

1) 'Masks' are not the same as keeping a grotty unwashed 'face covering' around for four months at a time, which has been actual practice in the UK.
2) China's success has got much more to do with welding infected folk into their apartment blocks than making them wear a mask. 
3) The face covering requirement has completely failed to stop three additional waves in Scotland, while the reckless Tory decision to bin that requirement resulted in no such recent wave.
4) None of this fucking matters anyway because we are falling over stacks of highly effective vaccines. 

Mask wearing was pointless as soon as they gave fatties and the "ahv got asthma" drama queens self diagnosed exemptions.

90 % of exemptions were for people with conditions which, on the face of it at least, would be in the most danger from not wearing a mask.  they are just  a visual reminder 

[BigDoddyKane]

Whens the next announcement from NS/SG, Id be interested to hear more about the testing for people arriving to Scotland and what their final desicion is and some facts and data behind their desicion. Do the media ever question her about the obvious questions you would think to ask over their statement last week, they never seem to be answered.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 22, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[scottsdad]

15 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I know there are a handful of posters on here who work at universities, so I suppose this inquiry is really directed at them.

I kind of want to ask, genuinely in good faith, about what's happening in the sector as regards direction and instruction.

This is prompted by my own daughter's experience as she starts her second year.  She was actually in a university building yesterday for the first ever time.  She's not back in for another month and is scheduled to be in again twice in November.  Even yesterday's lecture was delivered via Zoom.  I'm a bit enraged, but I know that other courses there and elsewhere are even worse, while some are much better.

I'm intrigued by how different arrangements can be.  Are unions instrumental here?  Do faculties have the autonomy to simply decide their own path.  What pressures are being exerted and from what directions are they arriving?

I do struggle to see how such a pale service can now be justified, but I'm honestly wanting to understand how it's been arrived at.

That's a lot of questions, but I'm needing to gain a little insight here, if only to try and resist launching a reactionary rant.

Absolutely fair questions to ask.  It is a numbers game.

I am teaching 2 classes this semester. One is a fairly small class with two scheduled classes in it, and as such I can offer students a weekly time to come in (either a Tuesday or a Wednesday). My other class is massive (over 400 students) and a room that can take 50, once a week. For this class I have asked students for their availability via a doodle poll and make a weekly rota from that. Students will be lucky to be in twice a semester for that class. Most will only be in once. On Monday I had 50 in the room with me and the rest joining using Collaborate Ultra. 

These restrictions come mostly from the government. They have asked universities to keep distancing and very restrictive class sizes (typically 20% of a room capacity). As such the room where I teach 50 students can actually 'take' many times as much. I taught this morning to 18 students in a room that, 2 years ago, I taught 75 in.

We have a number of students who say they are staying off campus completely, studying remotely. This means more chances for other students to come on to campus. 

The union is largely useless here. Like the EIS for schools they are pushing an agenda of keeping their members safe by increasing restrictions, and having more online and less in person. I stopped being a member of the union years ago. 

What I will say is that the online classes are not a bad substitute. In learning terms it can be just as good, or better. It is the social interactions that students and staff miss. I find it far, far easier to speak to a room with people in it. Students like it better also. I would also say that students in your daughter's year were hit the hardest as they had no uni experience in their first year, just relentless and endless online classes which really hurt the students over a whole year. 

Edited September 22, 2021 by scottsdad

[scottsdad]

14 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

The irony is that physical, in person, attendance was actually required yesterday for a lecture delivered remotely anyway.

That's hardly the point though.  The absence of in person seminars or tutorials leads, in my view, to a pretty incomplete educational experience.  That's before we consider the ongoing social damage of denying students the chance to meet and gather.  

I genuinely find it quite inexplicable that staff would either wish or be allowed to work in this way.  I'm trying to gain an understanding of why and how it's able to happen.

Genuine mix of opinions amongst my colleagues. Some want to do as little as possible in person, others (like me) want more in-person teaching. A recent survey by THES found that most academics surveyed felt worried for their safety. I guess this makes them like much of society - terrified to the point of silliness. 

[scottsdad]

2 hours ago, craigkillie said:

 

I'm not sure exactly what type of university building you work in, but very few university staff have been furloughed over the pandemic - it has mainly only been people whose personal circumstances didn't allow them to work from home and people whose jobs were non-essential but couldn't be done from home. From March-May 2020, everyone who could was asked to work from home, that was literally the government advice, so I'm not sure what your imaginary "real world" consisted of here.

At the uni where I work, lots of staff were furloughed - cleaners, kitchen staff, lab technicians, sports centre staff, shop workers. The academics and professional services staff were not.

Lab technicians were the first back, if working on a funded project. Kitchen staff were the last back.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Part of my job involves University accommodation and it was a similar experience for me with large numbers of the University staff (cleaners, supervisors etc) mostly furloughed with cleaning regimes reduced right down to absolute bare minimum. I think comments like your one and Gaz’ are maybe regarding teaching/office staff who went to WFH, but that accounts for only a section of University staff. It is certainly not “very few” of the overall University staff who were furloughed.

What proportion of the overall staff do they represent compared to lecturing, teaching, administrative and technical support staff? This is a genuine question, I have no idea. I know that our janitor was still working on campus for most of it though, so I'm not clear exactly which staff were being furloughed. My feeling was that it was still a small percentage of the overall staff of the university, but that could be wrong.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

11 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Genuine mix of opinions amongst my colleagues. Some want to do as little as possible in person, others (like me) want more in-person teaching. A recent survey by THES found that most academics surveyed felt worried for their safety. I guess this makes them like much of society - terrified to the point of silliness. 

are those same people terrified to go out for dinner/drinks/visit friends and family etc?

people always have and always will use excuses to get out of things they'd rather not do that they conveniently ignore for something which they do want to do

[scottsdad]

Just now, effeffsee_the2nd said:

are those same people terrified to go out for dinner/drinks/visit friends and family etc?

people always have and always will use excuses to get out of things they'd rather not do that they conveniently ignore for something which they do want to do

This is absolutely the case with one colleague I am thinking of. She was teaching in the spring, and the nurseries were shut. So she came to staff meetings with her toddler who was invariably bawling his eyes out during the calls. She was saying that she couldn't offer online classes as she had childcare issues - her husband worked from home as well and they could have managed something. In the end she recorded some lectures and offered nothing more that some email correspondence. The students were naturally up in arms about this.

This same woman has just returned from a holiday to Dubai and is kicking up a fuss that teaching a class is dangerous to her. She has no teaching this semester but is planting a flag now.

Meanwhile all the other staff members in our teaching team are getting on with it.

[Honest_Man#1]

16 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

What proportion of the overall staff do they represent compared to lecturing, teaching, administrative and technical support staff? This is a genuine question, I have no idea. I know that our janitor was still working on campus for most of it though, so I'm not clear exactly which staff were being furloughed. My feeling was that it was still a small percentage of the overall staff of the university, but that could be wrong.

Like you, I couldn’t give a figure or percentage as you’d need to have overall visibility of the entire University payroll. My only point was that you said “very few” which I’d consider to be under 5%, but I’d estimate between all estates, cleaning, support etc staff would be significantly more than 5% of a University payroll when taking into account their entire portfolio.

[Dawson Park Boy]

51 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

90 % of exemptions were for people with conditions which, on the face of it at least, would be in the most danger from not wearing a mask.  they are just  a visual reminder 

Anyone who wants one can get an exemption.

Wife and I have them but just keep them as back up in case we come up against any one over officious.

[Dawson Park Boy]

43 minutes ago, BigDoddyKane said:

Whens the next announcement from NS/SG, Id be interested to hear more about the testing for people arriving to Scotland and what their final desicion is and some facts and data behind their desicion. Do the media ever question her about the obvious questions you would think to ask over their statement last week, they never seem to be answered.

 

 

 

 

Scottish media are useless.