kingturnip posted:

Someone else already pointed it out, but that's a lovely attitude to have.
First of all, if your unit has been mostly turned into a Covid ITU, presumably you're wearing effective PPE most of the time so your exposure to Covid during your work shift is going to be limited. There are going to be a lot of staff in patient-facing roles that are at much higher risk of catching Covid than you are.
Secondly, "hurr durr Admin morons" is probably complete bullshit. HR - if they're anything like the Trust I work for - are likely flat-out trying to cover their regular workload as well as sorting out redeployment requests and a range of payroll stuff related to that. I doubt they're first in line for anything. If your Trust is under serious pressure, there probably aren't many admin staff supporting non-essential operations at the moment.
Thirdly, if ward staff are so stretched for time that they can't check their emails, how are they going to find the time to walk to wherever the vaccinations are taking place, queue up for a vaccine and then wait 15 minutes afterwards to check they have no adverse effects? I just checked my work email on my phone; it took less than 30 seconds.

Presumably, if take-up among ward staff is poo poo after a few weeks, someone will notice and try to make arrangements. If not, I'm sure you can send a passive-aggressive email to someone to let them know.

Dogatron posted:

I was also informed that staff who are working from home are travelling to the hospital to have a vaccination.

I don't think it's a lovely attitude to think that vaccinating the people staffing ventilated covid beds before office staff is a good idea. No PPE is perfect, and staff working clinically in a covid AGP producing environment should be the priority.

We haven't got a few weeks. We are expecting the surge next week.

Z the IVth posted:

The best way would have been to wheel a trolley into the various wards and just jab people in the corridor or coffee room.

Z the IVth posted:

I believe most staff are contractually obliged to check your emails since that's how the trust will communicate with you.

Dogatron posted:

This, but do it twice a day for as many days as it takes and also very early in the morning to catch the night staff.

Vaccinating a 25 year old who works in Media Communications for a NHS trust is hardly a priority.

ItohRespectArmy posted:

https://twitter.com/bfawu1/status/1347976566043791361

could be a big deal.

ItohRespectArmy posted:

https://twitter.com/bfawu1/status/1347976566043791361

could be a big deal.

mr_jolly posted:

What if the 25 year old who works in media communications has underlying health isssues, lives with someone who does or lives with an elderly relative?

Does that still make them a low priority to you?

Edit: in the time it took you to post about being to busy to check your emails, couldn't you have instead checked your emails and got the vaccine in front of those less worthy than yourself?

sebzilla posted:

Is this why Kieth has farted out a handful of yay unions tweets in the past couple of days?

ItohRespectArmy posted:

https://twitter.com/bfawu1/status/1347976566043791361

could be a big deal.

Z the IVth posted:

My trust opened to frontliners and high risk (comorbs) staff last week and all other staff next week. Everyone will have their vax by the end of next week.

OwlFancier posted:

But why does belief those ideas correlate almost entirely among party lines? I would argue that at the root of it it is because people fundamentally reject the idea of a democratic party president and the idea of the american democracy in general because it failed to return the result they wanted. The point is that they want their guy in charge, which is not a wrong thing to want in isolation! I want corbyn to be in charge of the UK if we're going to have anyone in charge of it, and if I could somehow snap my fingers and make that happen I would do it in an instant. Similarly if I could snap my fingers and make tory MPs have heart attacks until we eventually run out of them I would do that as well.

But they don't phrase it that way because the people feeding them those ideas, the people who run the actual news channels and have the actual presidency, and republican party, by the way, not some random social media people, know that they can't just say "we should install trump as a dictator" because they know a lot of people are not conditoned to like the sound of that. They phrase it as "restoring democracy" and "combating fraud" because "democracy" is a patriotic buzzword to a lot of people in the US. They are selling an emotional idea made out of nationalistic fluff that robes itself in what are, ultimately, entirely meaningless words and phrases that evoke happy feelings in the brains of the people doing it and give them a feeling of righteousness to their actions, because that feeling is necessary to motivate them to act.

They aren't convinced by the information, they start already believing the conclusion and then wrap that axiomatic belief in the trappings of an argument, an argument that only makes sense to them and other people who share that emotional, ideological belief. The specifics of the information are meaningless, what matters is the act of sharing it, the act of forming a community, the act of showing up with a shitload of other people all waving the flags you like and chanting and repeating the words you like to hear and holy poo poo we could just go in there and stop the fraud and free the country we'd be heroes...

What you're seeing is the power of emotional community, the resonance of collective action in the heart of ordinary human beings who, like all of us, are desperate for emotional fulfillment. And it's something that happens across the political spectrum, and it's something that has happened long before social media became a thing. The form might have changed a bit, but I don't think that the substance has that much. Social media being a highly effective communication platform I think has allowed that energy to build up a bit more easily than before, and I think that the atomization of capitalism has removed many of the more traditional counternarratives such as workplace communities, but I don't think it at all holds up to say that it is somehow the result of misinformation on social media that is causing the problem. The misinformation is and always has been spread via other routes, and there have always been other ways to form communities around it.

There was a good video by the Folding Ideas channel about qanon which I think goes over some of this stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTfhYyTuT44

forkboy84 posted:

https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1348021430089347073?s=20

ItohRespectArmy posted:

https://twitter.com/bfawu1/status/1347976566043791361

could be a big deal.

Jakabite posted:

I’ll give that a watch, thanks.

I guess I just don’t agree that this isn’t a huge shift. Sure we’ve always wrapped our minds into the right shapes to fit the facts to our feelings and beliefs, that isn’t new. But social media has brought about an enormous acceleration of that. Probabilistically, you can model Republicans, or any political group - if you have 50000 data points on a person you can determine whether they’re more likely to be Republican than Democrat. Not that you need to actually - that’s one of the data points. Now the whole point of social media is to create the most engagement which is done by showing people things to elicit an emotional response to provoke further engagement and investment. That’s all it is.

The result of that, though, is that those responses are happening every few seconds, in bite size slices, and the platform is getting better every time at provoking it. What it turns out this leads to is insane amounts of exposure to things which provoke these responses which tend not to be good into - in the case of the US for right wing leaning people that’s often Q stuff. How we interact with our phones is not similar to how propaganda and news have ever worked before. It just isn’t. Newspapers don’t tailor their content to each and every user. Note does broadcast tv, or radio. It also isn’t omnipresent in your life, and it also isn’t invisible to the people around you who it isn’t being tailored to. You don’t pick up a paper every time you have five spare minutes. You don’t habitually read newspapers - tv, radio, and papers aren’t addictive. Well, they can be obviously but not at all in the same way. Tv addiction isn’t a serious issue in the world whereas phone and sm addiction absolutely is.

What I’m saying is there’s a huge difference between how information has been manipulated in the past and how it is now. Far more relentless, far more devious, far more tailored. Sure, you’ve got the Republicans and other bad actors using these tools to tell people bullshit about election fraud, but they now have tools that are more effective than anything in history and it isn’t even close. And it only takes a nudge before users are making their own content, which is being shared by the algorithm to the right people and so on and so forth. Baked Alaska’s content is not getting promoted by the Republican Party or the Mercers. It’s just what the algorithm to increase engagement knows does well amongst a certain audience, because it promotes a certain emotional response (which is also why it’s good propaganda), and it shows those people more of it. That just is different to anything we’ve had before and to act like it’s just another iteration of a similar theme, in line with previous iterations, is going to leave us totally vulnerable.

NotJustANumber99 posted:

This is dumb but at least it isnt star wars.

So you long for a party that will fulfil your wish of not giving a poo poo about families? Being that families are composed of human beings, how do you expect this new party to cater to you better than those ones that insist on prattling on about families?

NotJustANumber99 posted:

Isn't it the job of the NHS person sitting in front of the computer... to sign up the NHS person doing actual health stuff for the jab?

Otherwise what are they even for?

crispix posted:

pre:

UP THE BUM.

YES, BABY.

Z the IVth posted:

checking your emails which is absolutely part of your work.

OwlFancier posted:

Leaves you extremely open to being adjusted to

code:

UP THE BUM?
NO, BABY!

by other parties.

forkboy84 posted:

https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1348021430089347073?s=20

therattle posted:

Tax cuts for single childless people. Sliding scale of increasing tax the more children one has. Harsher benefits cap. No paternity/maternity leave. Sounds wonderful...

crispix posted:

in a sane world we would be incentivising people not to have children imo

beans up the backside tax relief

OwlFancier posted:

As someone who does not have a family and doesn't want a family I really feel like there is a space in the political landscape for a party that doesn't give a poo poo about families.

Wachter posted:

forkboy84 posted:

It's more the vacuousness of it all. It's so Keith. Of course he's for families, what's the alternative, a policy of taking all children from their parents? He just is incapable of standing for anything and it boils my piss.

Plus it being Keith you do sort of fear the whole "kinder kirche, küchen" vibe

goddamnedtwisto posted:

Between massively increasing rents/mortgages and no attempt to cushion the career suicide that is having a kid for a woman in many industries, we've been doing that for four decades now. It's not gone well.

(In all seriousness the demographic timebomb that is caused by the plummeting fertility rates in the developed world is a genuine issue, with ripples from the massive stagnation of the Japanese economy to resurgent nationalism as countries across the West have to import a younger generation from the rest of the world. It's almost as if unchecked capitalism makes decisions that aren't the best for the long term)