Necrothatcher posted:

I dunno, Nigeria (and Lagos specifically) are pretty hot poo poo when it comes to viral outbreaks. They kicked rear end during the Ebola outbreak:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-did-nigeria-quash-its-ebola-outbreak-so-quickly/

quote:

The swift battle was won not only with vigilant disinfecting, port-of-entry screening and rapid isolation but also with boot leather and lots and lots of in-person follow-up visits,

XMNN posted:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52611466


just plain loving wrong laura, you've inserted a conditional "should go to work as long as it's safe" when it's actually an aspirational statement that you "must go to work, which we hope will be safe"

XMNN posted:

no where in his rambling speech does it actually say that you shouldn't go back to work if it's not safe, it says you should go to work which they want to be safe

XMNN posted:

crispix posted:

ARCTIC ICE DEATH PLUNGE!!!!!!

There might be a skiffle of snow...

in Lerwick

Jaeluni Asjil posted:

What's this Starmer / Saville thing I keep seeing references to but no details? Obviously, I didn't get the memo.

Guavanaut posted:

-10 Celsius Arctic Plunge Followed By 470 Rankine Summer Scorcher!

Darth Walrus posted:

https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1259759895781523456?s=21

lol

Guavanaut posted:

Dear Boris,

How do you Brexit with boxing gloves on?

<DELETED>

Camrath posted:

Edit: Miftan, are you psychic or something? You posted as I was typing that up..

JeremoudCorbynejad posted:

It's poor journalism but if they're gonna get something wrong, at least they're putting out a safer message than the PM

Darth Walrus posted:

https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1259759895781523456?s=21

lol

Miftan posted:

gently caress off, how hard is it to say 'people shouldn't go to work if it isn't safe'?

quote:

44 Health and safety cases.
(1)An employee has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that—
(a)having been designated by the employer to carry out activities in connection with preventing or reducing risks to health and safety at work, the employee carried out (or proposed to carry out) any such activities,
(b)being a representative of workers on matters of health and safety at work or member of a safety committee—
(i)in accordance with arrangements established under or by virtue of any enactment, or
(ii)by reason of being acknowledged as such by the employer,the employee performed (or proposed to perform) any functions as such a representative or a member of such a committee,
[F1(ba)the employee took part (or proposed to take part) in consultation with the employer pursuant to the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 or in an election of representatives of employee safety within the meaning of those Regulations (whether as a candidate or otherwise),]
(c)being an employee at a place where—
(i)there was no such representative or safety committee, or
(ii)there was such a representative or safety committee but it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to raise the matter by those means,he brought to his employer’s attention, by reasonable means, circumstances connected with his work which he reasonably believed were harmful or potentially harmful to health or safety,
(d)in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent and which he could not reasonably have been expected to avert, he left (or proposed to leave) or (while the danger persisted) refused to return to his place of work or any dangerous part of his place of work, or
(e)in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent, he took (or proposed to take) appropriate steps to protect himself or other persons from the danger.

quote:

100Health and safety cases.
(1)An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded for the purposes of this Part as unfairly dismissed if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is that—
(a)having been designated by the employer to carry out activities in connection with preventing or reducing risks to health and safety at work, the employee carried out (or proposed to carry out) any such activities,
(b)being a representative of workers on matters of health and safety at work or member of a safety committee—
(i)in accordance with arrangements established under or by virtue of any enactment, or
(ii)by reason of being acknowledged as such by the employer,the employee performed (or proposed to perform) any functions as such a representative or a member of such a committee,
(c)being an employee at a place where—
(i)there was no such representative or safety committee, or
(ii)there was such a representative or safety committee but it was not reasonably practicable for the employee to raise the matter by those means,he brought to his employer’s attention, by reasonable means, circumstances connected with his work which he reasonably believed were harmful or potentially harmful to health or safety,
(d)in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent and which he could not reasonably have been expected to avert, he left (or proposed to leave) or (while the danger persisted) refused to return to his place of work or any dangerous part of his place of work, or
(e)in circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed to be serious and imminent, he took (or proposed to take) appropriate steps to protect himself or other persons from the danger.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(e) whether steps which an employee took (or proposed to take) were appropriate is to be judged by reference to all the circumstances including, in particular, his knowledge and the facilities and advice available to him at the time.

Darth Walrus posted:

https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1259759895781523456?s=21

lol

Aramoro posted:

Section 44 does nothing to protect you as all your work needs to do is say they have taken all precautions and your workplace is safe. If you don't turn up then they can fire you. You might be able to get a tribunal to go your way if you can prove it wasn't safe but you're not getting one of them till next year so good luck I guess.

OwlFancier posted:

If jeremy corbyn was leader of the opposition he would have killed and eaten boris johnson on the floor of parliament by now.

Jose posted:

which unions backed starmer because lol at being immediately thrown under the bus

XMNN posted:

Fair enough, but surely how practical the law is to enforce (if we're assuming the workplace definitely is unsafe and a tribunal would find that) shouldn't affect whether you'd support a union telling it's members to follow it or not?

Guavanaut posted:

There was the bit where they were abusing kids in the basement of a pizza place that doesn't have a basement and using pizza related codewords.

When you get poo poo like that, it's normally because people don't want to face up to the more banal evil, like when people in the 80s were convinced that Satanic cults were holding secret black masses in churches and abusing kids as part of the ritual, because they couldn't accept the alternative, that the priest who works in the church and has keys to the church and is in and out of the church at all hours might be abusing kids.

bornbytheriver posted:

https://twitter.com/JerryHicksUnite...779043194535936