COVID-19: who’s going full doomsday prep on this?

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

ummm, what? Litterally never taken advice or taken anything ive reads on facebook as relevant to this or any other matter. While you've been away, here in Australia we've recently stopped applying the medical advice in full and are largely picking and choosing the bits that our political leaders feel best reflect a "balanced" approach. They get the advice, then don't listen to it. This couldn't be any clearer than from the from largley opposing positions Kerry Chant and Dominic Perrotet hold.

We also have the WHO (also not facebook news) who are warning about the overburdening of the hospital systems even with amilder disease. NSW doubled its hospitalisations from last week, but thats ok because "its not bad yet". Its like the threshold for doing anything is waiting untill it is actually bad. I remember something else along these lines, oh yeah, the vaccination stroll out.

As to why wouldn't we do it? because common sense to me says that if people are testing positive for a highly virulent disease, but they're asymptomatic, why would you risk allowing them to be out and further spreading? How many people will actually wear the mask or how will it even be policed? Many are going to treat it as if they dont have it. Sure the CDC are a reliable source for this sort of information, and we'll have to consider that in our national approach, but i suspect a lot of the advice we've chosen to implement is dependent on other precautions being in place som of our politicians (not chief medical officers) have felt is "not relevant for our demographic becaue of X". Its this approach of that gives me the biggest concern.

The fact that there isn't a grand unified global approach means that some of what were all doing is guess work based on what we do know, which is ever evolving.

reminds me of this

Initially the isolation period for COVID was 14 days. We -and many other OECD countries- have already reduced that on advice from our relevant Health Authorities. We are learning more by the day and we are also learning the challenges of trying to keep our infrastructure intact in the face of a more infectious yet more benign variant.

As for who to trust with all these changes? Well, the driving force behind the US’s reduction is the CDC. I don’t think there is a better qualified organisation on the planet when it comes to disease control and in case you’d missed it, the US is no longer under the control of an idiotic buffoon who denied almost every aspect of the disease at one stage or another.

In the UK it’s the UK Health Security Agency - again an industry body comprised of skilled, qualified individuals. The reduction to 7 days with lateral flow tests to be conducted before people are clear has been warmly welcomed by the NHS who have been struggling with staff shortages throughout the Omicron outbreak.

Whereas in Australia we’ve got a whole host of suitably qualified personnel such as the the chair of epidemiology at Deakin University amongst others, backing the proposal in this article here: https://www.theage.com.au/national/...ng-back-isolation-period-20211228-p59khw.html

There’s a balance act to be had and as everyone is still finding their feet on this, I am still inclined to follow the advice of those people who are more qualified than me and who are also prepared to follow the scientific method and occasionally change that advice when new evidence is unearthed.

 

[tubby74]

drove back through olympic park and the testing centre is closed today. it was originally a government centre which was replaced with a smaller private testing setup, but how can they not have resourced it to be open during this phase?

not sure if its a good thing or not, but the vax centre on the other side of the stadium had queues round the corner and out of site for boosters. i walked directly to a desk just under 3 weeks back

 

[Ackland]

I think we're punching above our weight here in Adelaide per capita and based on our population density.

And after 2 years of strong support on their response, our incumbent liberal government just took a few short weeks to flush their re-election chances down the loo.....

 

[Squidfayce]

Initially the isolation period for COVID was 14 days. We -and many other OECD countries- have already reduced that on advice from our relevant Health Authorities. We are learning more by the day and we are also learning the challenges of trying to keep our infrastructure intact in the face of a more infectious yet more benign variant.

As for who to trust with all these changes? Well, the driving force behind the US’s reduction is the CDC. I don’t think there is a better qualified organisation on the planet when it comes to disease control and in case you’d missed it, the US is no longer under the control of an idiotic buffoon who denied almost every aspect of the disease at one stage or another.

In the UK it’s the UK Health Security Agency - again an industry body comprised of skilled, qualified individuals. The reduction to 7 days with lateral flow tests to be conducted before people are clear has been warmly welcomed by the NHS who have been struggling with staff shortages throughout the Omicron outbreak.

Whereas in Australia we’ve got a whole host of suitably qualified personnel such as the the chair of epidemiology at Deakin University amongst others, backing the proposal in this article here: https://www.theage.com.au/national/...ng-back-isolation-period-20211228-p59khw.html

There’s a balance act to be had and as everyone is still finding their feet on this, I am still inclined to follow the advice of those people who are more qualified than me and who are also prepared to follow the scientific method and occasionally change that advice when new evidence is unearthed.

All for taking advice from the people in the field who are more knowledgable than me, but here is what I'm talking about

The below I don't have an issue with, quote University of Melbourne epidemiologist Tony Blakely from the age article you linked (saw that earlier today actually)

“If someone has COVID and they test negative on day five, let them go; there’s no point keeping them in there,” he said. “In the world where we’re living with COVID, the marginal benefit of keeping people in isolation when they test negative is small.”

VS

The CDC view

CDC Newsroom

Press releases, advisories, telebriefings, transcripts and archives.

www.cdc.gov

Given what we currently know about COVID-19 and the Omicron variant, CDC is shortening the recommended time for isolation from 10 days for people with COVID-19 to 5 days, if asymptomatic, followed by 5 days of wearing a mask when around others. The change is motivated by science demonstrating that the majority of SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurs early in the course of illness, generally in the 1-2 days prior to onset of symptoms and the 2-3 days after. Therefore, people who test positive should isolate for 5 days and, if asymptomatic at that time, they may leave isolation if they can continue to mask for 5 days to minimize the risk of infecting others.

What constitutes a majority? 99%, 80%, 51%? Coincidentally that data doesn't appear to be available on the CDC site supporting their statements. Not saying its not based on data, but if someone is going to say the "majority" of transmission occurs at a specific point, I'd like to be more informed around that detail so I could make my own decisions about the risks I take out there.

One suggests if you test negative on day 5, go about your things. The other says if you're positive, you're good to do as you please from day 6 if you don't have symptoms. While the prior may well fall into the category of the latter, I'd expect the measured advice to be first test, then decide, not just go about your business after 5 days. These two pieces of "advice" from professionals in their field sound similar, but are starkly different.

To someone who has comorbidities and at risk of actually developing a serious respiratory complication, I'd find it pretty unreasonable to leave it up to chance. In a shortsighted attempt to save money and reduce strain on testing, I predict the govt will take the CDC advice rather than that of our own local epidemiologist in tomorrows snap cabinet meeting mainly because we are having issues sourcing rapid tests. The best we can hope for is home rapid tests (if we can get them) on Day 5/6 (which i get was what our guy was referring to) and off you go. But again, this leaves it to chance that people will do the right thing and is not at all enforceable. I expect plenty of people to do the wrong thing. We've seen this movie before.

The other thing to consider with this is the rapid tests are fudgeable with some soda/acidic solutions by the looks of it, so Expect heaps of long term sickies from slack staff as they game this system.

 

[silentbutdeadly]

Exposed on Xmas Eve. Close contact tested on Xmas Day and officially notified last night. I've head cold like symptoms and had them since 27th. Tested today. Results maybe by New Year's Eve? By which time I'll try an RA test (we've a box at hand) and probably send it regardless since someone will have changed the rules again by then anyway.

 

[Nambra]

Interesting links there @Squidfayce.

One suggests if you test negative on day 5, go about your things. The other says if you're positive, you're good to do as you please from day 6 if you don't have symptoms.

I think Tony Blakely is sort of saying the same thing as the CDC - essentially, that when you're a stage of low transmission risk, then you shouldn't need to isolate anymore. The CDC simply further recommends that you wear a mask for another 5 days once you're no longer symptomatic. The "issue" I see with Tony's approach is that it requries you to have at least two tests vs. only one under CDC recommendations:

• Tony: symptoms, +ve test, isolate, wait five days, test, -ve result, carry on (but if you're still +ve after 5 days, what do you do, get another test?)
• CDC: symptoms, +ve test, isolate minimum 5 days and until no symptoms, carry on but wear a mask for another 5 days

Whilst I have nothing but respect for Tony's commentary, you could end up having 3 or more tests under his suggestion before you are negative, whereas the CDC approach only requires an initial test to confirm the disease, relying on the epidemiology to determine when a person is most likely a low transission risk. Perhaps this approach better suits the US situation too, where it is more endemic than it is here and testing is probably a waste of time and resources anyway?

 

[Squidfayce]

Yeah if you're still positive after 5 days, keep isolating. That's sort of the point and why you get the test in the first place. I don't see this as an issue at all. It's sensible.

the sentiment is the same, the approach is different. One is more conservative. I prefer the conservative approach.

 

[moorey]

Got my text today saying I’m for booster.
-Tried to call to make booking….line clogged up.
-Tried to book online…site crashed.
-Drove to the walk ins. Main one closed until 4th Jan. 5 chemists had signs out on the footpath ‘vaccinations available here NOW, no appointment needed’. Earliest any of them can do would be February.

Christ! Imagine the queue on 4th Jan when the main hub opens up.

 

[pink poodle]

The reduction to 7 days with lateral flow tests to be conducted before people are clear has been warmly welcomed by the NHS who have been struggling with staff shortages throughout the Omicron outbreak.

This happened here in NSW somewhere in the first few weeks. Shit went crazy in Newcastle and the local hospitals suddenly found a lot of their staff were also caught up in testing and isolation. Then they must have realised they were at risk of running out of staff and changed their requirements.

At the time a friend (nurse with hunter area health) was deemed a secondary close contact. Their testing regime for his was intensely rigid to ensure they didn't bring the virus into the hospital, including having to leave the building to consume their morning tea and lunch alone outside. Strangely they needed to finish their 2 weeks of the regime rather than just abandon it when the rules changed part way through.

drove back through olympic park and the testing centre is closed today. it was originally a government centre which was replaced with a smaller private testing setup, but how can they not have resourced it to be open during this phase?

not sure if its a good thing or not, but the vax centre on the other side of the stadium had queues round the corner and out of site for boosters. i walked directly to a desk just under 3 weeks back

Lots of testing centres in Newcastle had a planned closure across Christmas to new year. One reopened on boxing day to enormous lines. One isn't reopening until 4/1/22. I'm not sure about all the others, some of which had only just opened.

 

[ozzybmx]

SA, I left there with 3-4 cases a day, broken the big 4 digits in style with 1472

 

[Squidfayce]

Got my text today saying I’m for booster.
-Tried to call to make booking….line clogged up.
-Tried to book online…site crashed.
-Drove to the walk ins. Main one closed until 4th Jan. 5 chemists had signs out on the footpath ‘vaccinations available here NOW, no appointment needed’. Earliest any of them can do would be February.

Christ! Imagine the queue on 4th Jan when the main hub opens up.

wife called one of the GPs that had vaccine slots open on hot doc that publicly advertised not doing boosters at the moment and after a quick chat they were able to give her an appointment for a booster. Called 8:30am, shot done by 10am. might be worth a try

 

[Flow-Rider]

This happened here in NSW somewhere in the first few weeks. Shit went crazy in Newcastle and the local hospitals suddenly found a lot of their staff were also caught up in testing and isolation. Then they must have realised they were at risk of running out of staff and changed their requirements.

At the time a friend (nurse with hunter area health) was deemed a secondary close contact. Their testing regime for his was intensely rigid to ensure they didn't bring the virus into the hospital, including having to leave the building to consume their morning tea and lunch alone outside. Strangely they needed to finish their 2 weeks of the regime rather than just abandon it when the rules changed part way through.




Lots of testing centres in Newcastle had a planned closure across Christmas to new year. One reopened on boxing day to enormous lines. One isn't reopening until 4/1/22. I'm not sure about all the others, some of which had only just opened.

My friend's sister is a leading nurse in one of the main hospitals in Melbourne, not even anything to do with ICU, and she was denied holiday leave over the Christmas break and so did many others in her area.

 

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

All for taking advice from the people in the field who are more knowledgable than me, but here is what I'm talking about

The below I don't have an issue with, quote University of Melbourne epidemiologist Tony Blakely from the age article you linked (saw that earlier today actually)


VS

The CDC view

CDC Newsroom

Press releases, advisories, telebriefings, transcripts and archives.

www.cdc.gov

What constitutes a majority? 99%, 80%, 51%? Coincidentally that data doesn't appear to be available on the CDC site supporting their statements. Not saying its not based on data, but if someone is going to say the "majority" of transmission occurs at a specific point, I'd like to be more informed around that detail so I could make my own decisions about the risks I take out there.

One suggests if you test negative on day 5, go about your things. The other says if you're positive, you're good to do as you please from day 6 if you don't have symptoms. While the prior may well fall into the category of the latter, I'd expect the measured advice to be first test, then decide, not just go about your business after 5 days. These two pieces of "advice" from professionals in their field sound similar, but are starkly different.

To someone who has comorbidities and at risk of actually developing a serious respiratory complication, I'd find it pretty unreasonable to leave it up to chance. In a shortsighted attempt to save money and reduce strain on testing, I predict the govt will take the CDC advice rather than that of our own local epidemiologist in tomorrows snap cabinet meeting mainly because we are having issues sourcing rapid tests. The best we can hope for is home rapid tests (if we can get them) on Day 5/6 (which i get was what our guy was referring to) and off you go. But again, this leaves it to chance that people will do the right thing and is not at all enforceable. I expect plenty of people to do the wrong thing. We've seen this movie before.

The other thing to consider with this is the rapid tests are fudgeable with some soda/acidic solutions by the looks of it, so Expect heaps of long term sickies from slack staff as they game this system.

The thing is you’re making a lot of assumptions about what people will or won’t do and not really considering the vast differences in situation between Aus and the US. From what I’ve seen in Oz there is a massive demand for the RATs that the Federal Government have failed (yet again) to deliver on.

An attempt to shift the goalposts by going down the US path won’t work as far as placating the public and businesses go and it’s also at odds with everything Australia has ever done health-wise in the past - bear in mind we’re a nation that enforce the wearing of bicycle helmets even for short no-risk trips on bicycle paths and still won’t accept blood donations from people who were resident in the UK in the 80’s and 90’s due to the microscopic risk of CJD transmission.

Whether people do the right thing or not in regards to testing before finishing isolation is something that the authorities will have considered but then that’s always been the case regardless of the isolation period. Some people are just dicks who won’t isolate at all regardless of the presence of symptoms or length of time required in isolation. VICs last lockdown showed that it’s impossible to enforce health measures on an increasingly resistant public so why keep trying to flog a dead horse? In order to get the greatest amount of compliance you need to have people want to do the right thing. Acting like a strict parent is counterproductive

Lastly, I’m not sure what you’re getting at with the ‘sickie’ argument. Faking a positive COVID test is going to cause you far more grief than feigning back pain or mental health issues.
It seems like a lot of effort and the waste of a perfectly good kit when a simple phone call will suffice. As a nation we’ve been pulling sickies the old fashioned way for generations. I doubt that will change any time soon.

 

[wkkie]

I hope you’re all sitting down.

Old mate from the local café who says covid is fake (The government uses it to control our lives(, has been defying lockdowns and refusing to wear masks while actively encouraging others not to as well, and holding Weekly protest meetings behind close doors…..

Has now tested positive!

He is continuing to stay open and serve customers, but because he has copped some heat for it, he is now apparently serving on the sly out the back to his loyal customers, the majority of whom are 60+.

A mate of mine went to the cops about it and they asked what they expected them to do about it?

I really feel the need to name and shame this guy. Any suggestions about the best way to go about it?

Call DHHS (DFFS or whatever they're called now) the covid hotline, 000 and Crimestoppers if the locals won't do anything about it. That's crap.

 

[Minlak]

News article in today's local paper - There has been an outcry on Social Media Sites that the cases have increased in Bundaberg and yet no new tracing locations have been identified since the before Christmas. Several people have commented how they or the business they currently own is shut due to staff having Covid. The official response is that contact tracers are so overwhelmed that they are focusing on only sites of significance. What they considered significant was not defined but it has become pretty clear that even if you are using the check in app it is not really being monitored or actioned anyway as they cannot keep up. Well locally - and yes only around 150 cases active in our region currently but when you have virtually none the entire time its panicked a few people.

 

[Squidfayce]

The thing is you’re making a lot of assumptions about what people will or won’t do and not really considering the vast differences in situation between Aus and the US. From what I’ve seen in Oz there is a massive demand for the RATs that the Federal Government have failed (yet again) to deliver on.

I think you've made my point on that. Cant get a RAT in most places if you even want one. Slomo has already said "not a federal responsibility". Might be a cyncial perspective, but what has this sort of language been a prelude to before? Already washing his hands of yet another emerging debacle. The differences between the countries has less to do with it than what we've seen already happen here when things "arent a race" or when "it's up to the states and territories". Given that, I'm fairly confident in my assumptions, though would absolutely love to be wrong. Tomorrows cabinet meeting will give us a bit more clarity.

An attempt to shift the goalposts by going down the US path won’t work as far as placating the public and businesses go and it’s also at odds with everything Australia has ever done health-wise in the past - bear in mind we’re a nation that enforce the wearing of bicycle helmets even for short no-risk trips on bicycle paths and still won’t accept blood donations from people who were resident in the UK in the 80’s and 90’s due to the microscopic risk of CJD transmission.

Is it though? think more recently. Like in the last 24 months. Goalposts have been shifting pretty regularly. Each shift eroding more of an individuals ability to manage their own risk appetite in the face of this. All because it was getting too hard, or not enough resources to manage. But overpay for civil projects by a factor of 10-20? sure no worries. We went from having it relatively under control to "we'll all get it anyway and we have to learn to live with that" when really that didn't have to be the case.

The above shows over a year where we basically had it under control. Then all of a sudden it's like we looked to other countries and decided that those outcomes were somehow better. You have to wonder for who...

Saw the new jimmy carr special on netflix tonight and he has a joke

"who here has had covid?"
crowd cheers
"Who here thinks the whole covid thing has been overblown, overreacted to?"
crowd cheers
"the survivors would all agree with you"

of course there the economic side of this argument that has to be considered, but surely we were already the envy of the world. Lower unemployment, lower deaths, lower cases etc. I'm fairly certain we could have come up with long term solutions to manage through the scenario rather than risk the emerging one we've witnessed in other similar countries.

Whether people do the right thing or not in regards to testing before finishing isolation is something that the authorities will have considered but then that’s always been the case regardless of the isolation period. Some people are just dicks who won’t isolate at all regardless of the presence of symptoms or length of time required in isolation. VICs last lockdown showed that it’s impossible to enforce health measures on an increasingly resistant public so why keep trying to flog a dead horse? In order to get the greatest amount of compliance you need to have people want to do the right thing. Acting like a strict parent is counterproductive

You're right, so much truth in this. I generally think we fucked up enforcement really early on. It was made a joke of by all the non compliers consistently, loudly and very visibly. This prolonged the poor outcomes for everyone else and in the end bred such resentment in the complying population. SO the only solution to force compliance now would be inconceivable to anyone who hasn't grown up in a communist or authoritarian regime. There's no fix to this one unfortunately.

My issue is that my choices in how I manage my risk are being taken away with each decision the govt makes. The biggest one is I cant choose to work from home (even though I can, and have done for 18 months) unless the government stipulates that I can/should. This one small change would not be a huge impost in the current state of affairs, but the decision not to use this wording is purely an economic decision to drive people back into business centres to hopefully spend, keep offices space occupied etc.

Lastly, I’m not sure what you’re getting at with the ‘sickie’ argument. Faking a positive COVID test is going to cause you far more grief than feigning back pain or mental health issues.
It seems like a lot of effort and the waste of a perfectly good kit when a simple phone call will suffice. As a nation we’ve been pulling sickies the old fashioned way for generations. I doubt that will change any time soon.

Yea it was just a random thing to chuck in. Context - some industries (like the one my wife works in) pay you for covid related time off. It's unlimited. It's separate to your sick days. Full pay, and if your shift naturally accrued penalties (night, public holiday, weekends etc), you get those too if you were unable to attend due to covid related reasons. Tax dollars pay these wages by the way.

At her work place. there are already RATs done at the door before you enter the complex. There is literally a WhatsApp group where staff of all levels are sharing what materials they're trying up their nose to force an inconclusive or false positive result. With tests currently taking up to 6 days at the moment, if you're lucky you can get a week of fully paid leave for a couple hours wait in a line if you're successful fudging a work place RAT.

Right now, she gets a call every day she's not working to see if she wants overtime. There is a pool of about 50 "spare" staff that have to be placed throughout the complex every day which is supposed to cover normal operational absences - sickies, injuries, leave etc. For her to get a call every day she's off should give you an idea of how endemic fudging RATs already is.

What I was refering to was scenarios where such staff get a positive from a PCR when they actually get covid, you can bet those same people will extend their 5 day isolation to at least 10 or beyond by doing the same from home with higher success rates. Free money. if you're not doing it, you're behind.

 

[link1896]

I think you've made my point on that. Cant get a RAT in most places if you even want one. Slomo has already said "not a federal responsibility". Might be a cyncial perspective, but what has this sort of language been a prelude to before? Already washing his hands of yet another emerging debacle. The differences between the countries has less to do with it than what we've seen already happen here when things "arent a race" or when "it's up to the states and territories". Given that, I'm fairly confident in my assumptions, though would absolutely love to be wrong. Tomorrows cabinet meeting will give us a bit more clarity.



Is it though? think more recently. Like in the last 24 months. Goalposts have been shifting pretty regularly. Each shift eroding more of an individuals ability to manage their own risk appetite in the face of this. All because it was getting too hard, or not enough resources to manage. But overpay for civil projects by a factor of 10-20? sure no worries. We went from having it relatively under control to "we'll all get it anyway and we have to learn to live with that" when really that didn't have to be the case.

View attachment 384334

The above shows over a year where we basically had it under control. Then all of a sudden it's like we looked to other countries and decided that those outcomes were somehow better. You have to wonder for who...

Saw the new jimmy carr special on netflix tonight and he has a joke

"who here has had covid?"
crowd cheers
"Who here thinks the whole covid thing has been overblown, overreacted to?"
crowd cheers
"the survivors would all agree with you"

of course there the economic side of this argument that has to be considered, but surely we were already the envy of the world. Lower unemployment, lower deaths, lower cases etc. I'm fairly certain we could have come up with long term solutions to manage through the scenario rather than risk the emerging one we've witnessed in other similar countries.


You're right, so much truth in this. I generally think we fucked up enforcement really early on. It was made a joke of by all the non compliers consistently, loudly and very visibly. This prolonged the poor outcomes for everyone else and in the end bred such resentment in the complying population. SO the only solution to force compliance now would be inconceivable to anyone who hasn't grown up in a communist or authoritarian regime. There's no fix to this one unfortunately.

My issue is that my choices in how I manage my risk are being taken away with each decision the govt makes. The biggest one is I cant choose to work from home (even though I can, and have done for 18 months) unless the government stipulates that I can/should. This one small change would not be a huge impost in the current state of affairs, but the decision not to use this wording is purely an economic decision to drive people back into business centres to hopefully spend, keep offices space occupied etc.



Yea it was just a random thing to chuck in. Context - some industries (like the one my wife works in) pay you for covid related time off. It's unlimited. It's separate to your sick days. Full pay, and if your shift naturally accrued penalties (night, public holiday, weekends etc), you get those too if you were unable to attend due to covid related reasons. Tax dollars pay these wages by the way.

At her work place. there are already RATs done at the door before you enter the complex. There is literally a WhatsApp group where staff of all levels are sharing what materials they're trying up their nose to force an inconclusive or false positive result. With tests currently taking up to 6 days at the moment, if you're lucky you can get a week of fully paid leave for a couple hours wait in a line if you're successful fudging a work place RAT.

Right now, she gets a call every day she's not working to see if she wants overtime. There is a pool of about 50 "spare" staff that have to be placed throughout the complex every day which is supposed to cover normal operational absences - sickies, injuries, leave etc. For her to get a call every day she's off should give you an idea of how endemic fudging RATs already is.

What I was refering to was scenarios where such staff get a positive from a PCR when they actually get covid, you can bet those same people will extend their 5 day isolation to at least 10 or beyond by doing the same from home with higher success rates. Free money. if you're not doing it, you're behind.

Knowing a bunch of people in front line medical professions, they are utterly exhausted. I can’t blame them for one minute seeking more r&r time.
The old EBA’s just don’t stack up in these covid times.

 

[Squidfayce]

Knowing a bunch of people in front line medical professions, they are utterly exhausted. I can’t blame them for one minute seeking more r&r time.
The old EBA’s just don’t stack up in these covid times.

I agree with you. Though the govt thinks state of affairs is just fine.

years ago i worked for an employer that had an interesting Idea . Part of my induction (part of everyone's induction actually) was to go an work in different parts of the business before you were even to step into the role you were actually hired for. Right down to the shit kicker frontline roles for a week at a time. The induction was like a 3 month process and considered an investment in all staff. The purpose was to give you context to the challenges of the role an the business operations. It also helped build connections among staff and made senior staff approachable (even c-suite staff would do these rotations). It was fun watching General Managers trying to negotiate with angry clients being allowed only to access the tools available to those staff (no writing shit off because you're the boss etc.).

Its a shame that career bureaucrats aren't required to do something similar.

 

[Dales Cannon]

A mate was all for opening borders months ago for the economy but couldn't actually explain how and why vs likely overload on medical facilities and personnel. Political, Christmas, election, fuckwits.

 

[link1896]

I agree with you. Though the govt thinks state of affairs is just fine.

years ago i worked for an employer that had an interesting Idea . Part of my induction (part of everyone's induction actually) was to go an work in different parts of the business before you were even to step into the role you were actually hired for. Right down to the shit kicker frontline roles for a week at a time. The induction was like a 3 month process and considered an investment in all staff. The purpose was to give you context to the challenges of the role an the business operations. It also helped build connections among staff and made senior staff approachable (even c-suite staff would do these rotations). It was fun watching General Managers trying to negotiate with angry clients being allowed only to access the tools available to those staff (no writing shit off because you're the boss etc.).

Its a shame that career bureaucrats aren't required to do something similar.

That is a really good idea.
Woolies CEO the other week had to ask what AdBlue was. JFC mate you run a business that is failing in an instant without trucking, fuck that’s got to be one of the biggest truck fleets in Oz. . Shameful.