MrFlibble

Two good articles: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54228649 We clearly need to change our approach; the virus cannot be eliminated. We are creating a huge burden on the younger generation, who are likely not to even be eligible for a vaccine, when one eventually starts to be rolled out.

You make a valid point but, given there are 3 people in their team, that is unlikely. Most people who are infected with Sars-Cov-2 are asymptomatic; only a relatively small proportion of infections result in severe Covid19 symptoms.

I still don't know if ours ever got them! But I guess that makes sense for those students as it would not be easy for the LA to re-allocate. Was that a MAT decision or is this DfT guidance? I personally can see pros and cons for each approach and have no preference; I am only asking because our SLT are not sure what the best approach is and asked if I can find out what other schools are doing. So any info like this is really useful to know, thanks to anyone who can answer this

This is true; I don't agree with anyone claiming they make things worse, and their logic is indeed flawed, but the statistics of what is happening in differing countries with differing policies cannot be ignored; if they made things much better then you'd not see Sweden doing so well, and yet Spain and France seeing a huge increase in cases. The reality is they probably make very little difference.

If all students who were allocated laptops are back in school, and now in Year 11, what happens now? Are we supposed to let them keep the laptops until the end of Year 11? Or are we supposed to take them back, and have them ready to re-allocate in the event of any students who are required to isolate in the coming months? Or is it entirely the school's choice? What are other schools doing? Thanks in advance

The new local lockdowns aren't really lockdowns as such but just have a set of restrictions. These may vary by area. There's a good discussion on 'local lockdowns' on this forum: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/local-lockdown-in-greater-manchester-east-lancashire-and-parts-of-west-yorkshire-discussion.207180/page-18 (there is a huge Covid19 section there with a wide range of topics; it's a really useful source of info) For example if you live in a local lockdown area you may be restricted in terms of your social life but this would not in any way impact on your ability to go to work. If your school is in a local lockdown area, but you live outside any such area, then you are not bound any such restrictions at home, but you would be bound by restrictions when in the relevant area, and the school would have to apply any relevant restrictions.

I found this after a search; this is useful information. We plan to deploy the Summer 20 release shortly; once we have it deployed, is it obvious how to do it? Thanks

How does this work in terms of exemptions? Also do they have to be a particular colour or does anything go? What if a child has their mask lost/stolen or if it gets dirty etc? Also is anyone using keyboard covers? We've been asked to order some, I think it's OTT and unworkable but the problem is that someone suggested it and we've been told we have to at least give them a try.

It's not true to say it would never be possible; I've visited Brompton Road station! Not accessible to the masses is a different matter.

That article makes some incorrect statements/assumptions, such as this: This is wrong on so many levels; for a start their statement appears to be suggesting that only people who test positive for an antibody test have any immunity; this not only ignores the fact that the body's ability to produce antibodies is not necessarily detectable in an antibody test, but also ignores the crucial role that T Cells play in fighting Sars-Cov-2. I'd have thought the journalist responsible for this article would have been aware of the role of T-cells, given that the importance of T-cell immunity was highlighted over 3 months ago! A very poor effort. I'm not sure what you are saying exactly. If you look at my earlier post, is there anything in particular I said that you disagree with? This isn't a justifiable reason to add yet another reason for bullying, and yet another problem for school staff to face at what is already going to be a very challenging time. Don't you think school staff have enough on their plate as it is, without having to police the wearing of masks? There is going to be no compulsion to wear masks at my school unless it is forced upon the school. But even then I cannot see staff being forced to wear masks, as I am not aware of staff in any other non-medical community setting being forced to wear them. Those who claim it can be forced upon staff cannot offer any legal precedent for this, and cannot offer any example of any other role where this is legally required. That's because it cannot be forced upon us.

Here are some examples demonstrating how people with exemptions have been treated: This is how people are being made to feel: https://twitter.com/moodycowhere/status/1288557070267174913 https://twitter.com/tragicjodie/status/1287196259045068800 While I recognise that we will never get consensus on the mandating of masks in any setting, I do hope everyone would agree that the way these people have been treated is not acceptable.

Many of these people are not behind screens; I agree with you it would be unhealthy. I'm glad you agree they are not suitable for classrooms; unfortunately some people disagree with us and want to take this even further. I still disagree over communal areas as it's not really enforceable (unless all staff have easy access to a list of exactly who is subject to an exemption, or you force those people to wear lanyards/badges, which I'm not entirely comfortable about) and there are questions regarding the safe storage of the face coverings and keeping them clean which are unresolved, and then there are issues with disposal if we're talking about disposable masks. I'm not sure about that; do kids keep their pockets clean enough at all times that the contents could be breathed in? Can I ask why you're so for them? Sweden is doing very well and they don't mandate masks in any community setting. Most people who are exposed to SARS-Cov-2 will not develop Covid19 symptoms; of those that do, it will be mild for the vast majority. If you are talking about those who get seriously ill, then the same could be said for 'flu. Did you know around 12 children under 15 die annually each year from 'flu in England alone? This is a false claim; I've spoken to people based in Sweden and the vast majority do not think this way. Only a small, vocal minority do. As for deaths per capita, I think you should measure that at the end of the pandemic! If you compare Sweden to France or Spain, it is pretty clear that Sweden have got over the worst of it relatively early on, while France and Spain are seeing a resurgence. You need to look at the overall strategy, and all the evidence so far suggests Sweden got it right. It's certainly far too early to suggest otherwise, especially as the trends do not support your position. You are entitled to your opinion. But others disagree. Are you aware of the increase in abuse towards people who are exempt, including people with autism? If you're not, I'll be happy to quote some examples of this. The development needs of children should not be swept aside like this; the interests children and young people have thus far been put last in this pandemic and it's time to put their needs first. I don't agree; I've not seen anyone fully address all the issues. Our SLT is against them because they know of the problems they will cause. A class teacher would have instant access to the data, but if they are not wearing them in classrooms and if you are wanting enforcement on corridors, how would any staff in the corridors at the time be supposed to know who is/isn't exempt? Therefore, you can't really enforce it. Start/end of the day, between lessons, break times, lunch times. That would not be enforceable in my opinion. I know for a fact staff cannot be made to wear face coverings in settings such as shops and public transport, so I fail to see how a school would be different. It's not true to suggest all these staff wear masks all the time and they legally do not have to and their employer cannot make them. It's easy to say "it isn't hard" but many of the staff I've spoken to say a different view. Yes you can tell people to tuck their shirt in but you couldn't tell a kid to wear a mask unless you have checked they are not exempt. If you are in a big school that could be a lot of names and faces and you would not be able to know all of them. That's not a good reason to mandate masks in schools. The mandating of masks in public transport and retail settings has caused exempt people to not only be bullied by others, but also intimidated by some staff. There are plenty of examples of this documented on social media if you don't believe me. Firstly, it is very subjective and different staff will draw the line in different ways, so it's yet another issue which you have to get pastoral staff involved in to make a judgement. As for advocating disposable masks, this isn't what the WHO recommend, and what about the environmental concerns? Also do you deny that littering of disposable masks is already becoming a problem in some places, and if you forced students to wear these, you would be creating an even bigger problem? My boss is against them too, so no problem there Yes they don't care about people with asthma, autism and other conditions over there. That's now how we should run our society. That's easy for you to say but I would argue it lacks compassion for others. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but the law disagrees with you and many others do too. We will never get consensus on this issue but the law in the UK regarding exemptions is not going to change. I'm sorry but why should people with anxiety, asthma and other exemptions be excluded from society or put through extreme discomfort just to make you feel less "at risk"? On the contrary; people who disregard the needs of those with exemptions are the ones being as you describe. On the contrary; it is unlawful for you to exclude these people from society. If you want to exclude all risks from viruses, then it is not others who need to stay at home and exclude themselves from society; you are looking at it the wrong way round. It's a real shame they feel they cannot go out as much as they did before masks were mandated. This is not something we should see in a civilised society. It would not be the case in a country like Sweden, who has approached this far better than we have I applaud you for trying; my advice would be to keep trying and you will get there. Firstly, yes you are right with the logic (except we should be in) Secondly if you are referring to public transport, then on many routes trains (not so sure about buses) are actually busier at those times than the traditional "peak" times! If the aim was to eliminate the virus, then yes. But in reality we are told it is here to stay and we have to learn to live with it. Just as we had to do in 1918. The advice is to travel "off peak" and the vast majority are doing that, therefore most peak trains are very lightly loaded. There will always be exceptions, of course, and things will change, on some routes at least, in September. For example yesterday morning the 07:21 from Stevenage to London had only 50 passengers on board the entire 12 coach train. This would normally be full and standing, with perhaps 1000 people on board. Only two people in the 12th coach!

Retail & public transport staff are exempt; can you think of any examples where staff were previously never expected to wear masks and yet are now legally required to wear them? I can't think of any... If you think the mandating of masks has not been divisive, then I can only assume you've not become aware of the numerous arguments and disputes that have occurred Not sure about this; can we really force kids with exemptions to wear a label? And what if they forget their lanyard? Is there no risk this could lead to bullying? What if a kid wears a scary mask and ends up sat near a kid who doesn't like it? Have you seen some of the novelty masks out there? What if a kid loses their mask? If they are going to get into trouble, do you think other kids may hide then? You say masks should be stored in pockets, but can we be sure kids will keep their pockets clean? If disposable masks are used, do you think litter definitely won't be a problem?

They are uncomfortable There is no justifiable reason to wear them in a school environment; sensible countries such as Sweden don't encourage masks in any environment let alone schools They are divisive They make communication difficult There is the issue of storing them when not being worn, keeping them clean, etc Enforcement is impossible; how do you know who is exempt? They are likely to cause issues such as conflicts, bullying, peer pressure etc That doesn't answer my question. If we refuse to, what are the options? Can they just sack us or do they have to offer a redundancy package? So you think there is no issue with students wearing almost any design they want?

What are our rights here? Can we be forced to wear a mask? If we refuse, can they make us redundant or even sack us? In terms of pupils having to wear them, I don't see how it can possibly be enforced by school staff; how are staff supposed to know who is covered by an exemption? Would the school have to have a list? and what could the punishment be? Also surely this would make it difficult to recognise students, especially when relying on CCTV? And how would you get to know the new Year 7s? And would the school be able to, or required to, mandate masks of a particular design/colour? What if students come into school with a comical face covering? e.g. crazy teeth, a Joker, or Batman? Would this not result in discarded masks around some school grounds if students wear disposable masks? I quite agree. It's utter madness.

In a particular classroom if I plug the projector into the mains power outlet in the ceiling, and the PC into a mains power outlet in the wall, there is a strange strobing effect scrolling vertically down the projected image. The image is absolutely fine with no problems whatsoever if the projector is, like the PC, also plugged into an adjacent socket in the wall. It's not an issue with the projector (I tried two), or the PC (I tried two, of different models), or the VGA cable (we are using a splitter but I got a brand new cable and used this to connect the PC directly into the projector). The problem is more noticeable when using a splitter, and even more so when using a long VGA cable (both of which would be required in normal use), but even using a short VGA cable with no splitter it's still noticeable. I do not believe this is an 'IT problem' as such, but some sort of power problem. However our site manager (who was previously a qualified electrician) is at a loss as to why this could be occurring. I believe the socket in the ceiling probably goes to a different distribution board to the sockets in the wall. Could it be something to do with the 'phase' of the electricity or something? Has anyone experienced a problem like this before, and if so what was the solution?

I managed to get one of these c2g-trulink-2-port-uxga-monitor-splitter for £25, and although it comes with a cable to get power from USB, it didn't seem to need it, and was able to get power from the VGA output of the PC. I need to get some more, so may get more of the same unless anyone can say if any of the other suggestions are a lot better? I like the idea of not having to have a separate USB cable plugged in; there's less to go wrong! Are there any drawbacks to this mode of operation? I did try an unpowered splitter as a comparison; it was a lot dimmer! I'd definitely avoid unpowered splitters.