2,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatreian on Sept 23, 2020 11:22:52 GMT
I was wondering how coffee shops will deal with the table service from tomorrow as most don't have this in place, especially the chains such as Costa etc. It will be a shame if they go back to takeaway only . On the above I have seen the gov site about the guidance: Businesses selling food or drink (including cafes, bars, pubs and restaurants), social clubs, casinos, bowling alleys, amusement arcades (and other indoor leisure centres or facilities), funfairs, theme parks, adventure parks and activities, and bingo halls, must be closed between 10pm and 5am. This will include takeaways but delivery services can continue after 10pm (from 24 September). In licensed premises, food and drink must be ordered from, and served at, a table. Customers must eat and drink at a table in any premises selling food and drink to consume indoors, on site (from 24 September). From this is appears that the table service only applies to Licensed premises , so coffee shops and fast food should be ok to order at counter, but then you must eat at a table if eating inside. There are so many changes, it must be a nightmare running a hospitality business at the moment. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2020 12:56:18 GMT
It's not going to be much of a change for most pubs. The pubs I go to only ever had about three bar stools at the bar anyway and all of them removed them back in July so it's already a matter of sitting at a table whether you're having a meal or just there for a drink. The curfew isn't much of a change either: the pubs I go to rarely have anyone there at all by 22:00 and usually close earlier than that if there's nobody left.
It'll be a problem for the crowded drinking pubs, but that's the whole point.
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 24, 2020 12:06:50 GMT
|
|
2,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatreian on Sept 24, 2020 12:22:52 GMT
|
|
2,763 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Sept 24, 2020 12:23:31 GMT
Nothing to help out theatres from the looks of things. The new scheme only applies if people are working 33% of standard hours, so theatres (and other creative industries) where people aren't working at all can't get any benefit. Sunak says he can only help out "viable" jobs, which suggest that he doesn't regard the creative sector as viable. Looks like most of the redundancy consultations going on now will conclude with lots of redundancies.
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 24, 2020 12:29:44 GMT
Nothing to help out theatres from the looks of things. The new scheme only applies if people are working 33% of standard hours, so theatres (and other creative industries) where people aren't working at all can't get any benefit. Sunak says he can only help out "viable" jobs, which suggest that he doesn't regard the creative sector as viable. Looks like most of the redundancy consultations going on now will conclude with lots of redundancies. That's the thing. Theatre, events. So many sectors are out of action now for at least another six months. That's hundreds of thousands of jobs just gone. |
|
2,505 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 24, 2020 12:50:46 GMT
Nothing to help out theatres from the looks of things. The new scheme only applies if people are working 33% of standard hours, so theatres (and other creative industries) where people aren't working at all can't get any benefit. Sunak says he can only help out "viable" jobs, which suggest that he doesn't regard the creative sector as viable. Looks like most of the redundancy consultations going on now will conclude with lots of redundancies. That's the thing. Theatre, events. So many sectors are out of action now for at least another six months. That's hundreds of thousands of jobs just gone. Their calculation is that the jobs will come back once the virus is contained. WHich i doubt very much of course.... |
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 24, 2020 13:22:59 GMT
Just days after a sharp rise in cases and tighter restrictions, apparently we can "no longer put our lives on hold" and we must "learn to live with it"
|
|
2,505 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 24, 2020 13:31:57 GMT
Just days after a sharp rise in cases and tighter restrictions, apparently we can "no longer put our lives on hold" and we must "learn to live with it" Rishi vs the scientists. |
|
1,251 posts
|
Post by joem on Sept 24, 2020 17:15:07 GMT
Scientists, the new gods, say different things. Much like the old gods. We can choose the ones we believe.
Goodbye theatre, goodbye humanity. This was coming for some time, the sheer weight of garbage we have been bombarded with since the advent of the internet - and which is accelerating exponentially - was bound to end in madness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2020 19:21:26 GMT
Just days after a sharp rise in cases and tighter restrictions, apparently we can "no longer put our lives on hold" and we must "learn to live with it" Well that is blindingly obvious given there isnt going to be a vaccine or cure anytime soon - not sure why anyone should be surprised. There is no alternative. |
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 24, 2020 20:09:43 GMT
Just days after a sharp rise in cases and tighter restrictions, apparently we can "no longer put our lives on hold" and we must "learn to live with it" Well that is blindingly obvious given there isnt going to be a vaccine or cure anytime soon - not sure why anyone should be surprised. There is no alternative. Is it blindingly obvious? It is clear that coronavirus is not something that can simply be "lived with", given the long term damage it leaves. And with that being the case, fear is natural. It isn't as binary as they are making it. |
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 24, 2020 20:51:23 GMT
Agree lives cannot be on hold but fear is a necessity to make sure we take the risks seriously and mitigate appropriately.
The fear of being run over makes sure I look both ways before crossing the road, the fear of a head injury makes me wear a helmet when cycling, fear is a core survival instinct.
A dangerous and unproductive statement.
Believe the kudos he has generated thus far is at risk of evaporating when the true cost to businesses of his job retention scheme is fully understood, at 33% of hours worked the employee will take home less pay and the employer will pay 55% of their wages for 33% attendance.
In reality most SME’s are likely to prefer 3 full time employees rather than 9 job sharers with the additional admin costs. This will also hit the young or recently employed hard as there is no redundancy costs associated with those who have not been employed for at least two years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2020 20:54:44 GMT
Well that is blindingly obvious given there isnt going to be a vaccine or cure anytime soon - not sure why anyone should be surprised. There is no alternative. Is it blindingly obvious? It is clear that coronavirus is not something that can simply be "lived with", given the long term damage it leaves. And with that being the case, fear is natural. It isn't as binary as they are making it. Well any form of carrying on any economic or social activity is a form of living with it, so yes, I do think it's blindingly obvious. It is a binary choice between participating in society at all (however minimally) or not. And for many that will mean a binary choice between working or not working (unless their job is impossible). Posts on here just a few days were saying that you all arent advocating being hermits until there is a vaccine or cure, so if you arent being a hermit then you are living with it. No-one said anything about not being fearful or careful, being cautious has to be a part of it, but the world doesn't stop. It can't stop, otherwise the mass unemployment and poverty will be even worse than it is already going to be this winter. We all live with so many other diseases, this is another one that has to be lived with in the same way, taking precautions against getting it (which for this virus means masks, sanitizing and social distancing) in the same way that you are advised to mitigate risks of other diseases by doing various things (e.g. losing weight and avoiding fatty foods to avoid diabetes or a heart attack). It's the same principles, different risk mitigation measures. Either way you get on with life, with limitations yes, but still getting on with it. The other option is isolation, which is a choice but not necessary unless you want to reduce your risk as close to zero as you can rather than a balanced risk assessment. It isn't the only illness with long term impact, there are plenty that are much harder to avoid (e.g. Lyme disease - anyone can be bitten by a tick even if they are super cautious) where the impact can be devastating. Coronavirus doesn't get its own pedestal in that regard, it's just the most prevalent one at present which is why it is getting the same coverage as Spanish flu, Ebola and many other diseases that have spiked in the past. That doesn't mean it should be treated any differently in terms of approach, the risk mitigation principles are the same, it is just which actions are necessary for each disease that differs. |
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 24, 2020 22:09:13 GMT
Is it blindingly obvious? It is clear that coronavirus is not something that can simply be "lived with", given the long term damage it leaves. And with that being the case, fear is natural. It isn't as binary as they are making it. Well any form of carrying on any economic or social activity is a form of living with it, so yes, I do think it's blindingly obvious. It is a binary choice between participating in society at all (however minimally) or not. And for many that will mean a binary choice between working or not working (unless their job is impossible). Posts on here just a few days were saying that you all arent advocating being hermits until there is a vaccine or cure, so if you arent being a hermit then you are living with it. No-one said anything about not being fearful or careful, being cautious has to be a part of it, but the world doesn't stop. It can't stop, otherwise the mass unemployment and poverty will be even worse than it is already going to be this winter. We all live with so many other diseases, this is another one that has to be lived with in the same way, taking precautions against getting it (which for this virus means masks, sanitizing and social distancing) in the same way that you are advised to mitigate risks of other diseases by doing various things (e.g. losing weight and avoiding fatty foods to avoid diabetes or a heart attack). It's the same principles, different risk mitigation measures. Either way you get on with life, with limitations yes, but still getting on with it. The other option is isolation, which is a choice but not necessary unless you want to reduce your risk as close to zero as you can rather than a balanced risk assessment. It isn't the only illness with long term impact, there are plenty that are much harder to avoid (e.g. Lyme disease - anyone can be bitten by a tick even if they are super cautious) where the impact can be devastating. Coronavirus doesn't get its own pedestal in that regard, it's just the most prevalent one at present which is why it is getting the same coverage as Spanish flu, Ebola and many other diseases that have spiked in the past. That doesn't mean it should be treated any differently in terms of approach, the risk mitigation principles are the same, it is just which actions are necessary for each disease that differs. I suppose it comes down to your own definition of living. As far as I'm concerned at the moment we are existing with it, no more. Life is social events, theatre, comedy, dancing, experiences, relationships, meeting new people. These things have to all intents and purposes stopped during Covid with no sign of restarting. |
|
2,505 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Sept 24, 2020 22:43:46 GMT
My observation generally is that people aren't going to tolerate social distancing/lockdown past this winter (and I dont even think it will last for winter)
|
|
5,074 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 24, 2020 23:41:59 GMT
It is very clear that a strong economy and Covid will not co-exist. So we need a vaccine asap, this is the only real way forward. We know more about this virus than we did 6 months ago, which is a good thing.
A sharp increase in the infection sharpens the mind.
I now see more people wearing masks on public transport, it is just the odd person that needs dealing with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 0:51:18 GMT
I suppose it comes down to your own definition of living. As far as I'm concerned at the moment we are existing with it, no more. Life is social events, theatre, comedy, dancing, experiences, relationships, meeting new people. These things have to all intents and purposes stopped during Covid with no sign of restarting. I guess my definition of living is being able to leave my house for more than groceries or exercise, and being able to see people. Ok, I can't see more than 5 others at the minute, but it's better than nothing. The odd bit of theatre I'm able to see is also better than nothing. I agree we are definitely more existing than living, as I am desperate to get all of those things you mention back (and to travel) but back in March we definitely weren't living. Go back to a full lockdown and I simply will not cope - I'm off work with stress as it is, and forced isolation/permanent working from home again is not going to be something I can deal with right now. |
|
4,810 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Sept 25, 2020 6:50:54 GMT
My observation generally is that people aren't going to tolerate social distancing/lockdown past this winter (and I dont even think it will last for winter) Already struggling to tolerate it now. I think you’re right there - people just won’t do it anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 8:39:39 GMT
The contact-tracing app has rolled out: the latest in a long line of government projects that can be summed up as "we're going to go our own way and create a world-beating British solution; we've spent a fortune and achieved nothing; let's go back to doing what everyone else is doing because then it might work".*
*I'm looking at you, Brexit.
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 25, 2020 9:41:46 GMT
The contact-tracing app has rolled out: the latest in a long line of government projects that can be summed up as "we're going to go our own way and create a world-beating British solution; we've spent a fortune and achieved nothing; let's go back to doing what everyone else is doing because then it might work".* *I'm looking at you, Brexit.Genuine question - so I download the app. Doesn't it rely on everybody else having done the same? Isn't it a case of everybody has to download it or why bother? |
|
2,413 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatreian on Sept 25, 2020 10:14:06 GMT
I guess we are just not made to be patient any more. It is difficult not being able to do so much, but compared to March we can do quite a bit. Our society now is not as stoical as it once was. We are more angry and demanding. More pressure from social media etc does not help.
I guess hedgehogs will have it the best , they can hibernate for the winter and when they wake up , it might all be sorted!!
|
|
|
|
Post by nick on Sept 25, 2020 10:27:37 GMT
The contact-tracing app has rolled out: the latest in a long line of government projects that can be summed up as "we're going to go our own way and create a world-beating British solution; we've spent a fortune and achieved nothing; let's go back to doing what everyone else is doing because then it might work".* *I'm looking at you, Brexit.Genuine question - so I download the app. Doesn't it rely on everybody else having done the same? Isn't it a case of everybody has to download it or why bother? Short answer is yes. But it needs something like a 60% take up I believe. It also needs people to report to the app when they get a positive test result. Nowhere near perfect but then the alternative is the existing track and trace (phone calls) which seems pretty hopeless. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 11:14:48 GMT
The contact-tracing app has rolled out: the latest in a long line of government projects that can be summed up as "we're going to go our own way and create a world-beating British solution; we've spent a fortune and achieved nothing; let's go back to doing what everyone else is doing because then it might work".* *I'm looking at you, Brexit.Genuine question - so I download the app. Doesn't it rely on everybody else having done the same? Isn't it a case of everybody has to download it or why bother? The majority of people, yes. But that goes for many things in life: they only work if there's a large uptake. And now they've scrapped the ridiculously privacy-hostile central database idea there's not really any downside to the app apart from having to recharge a little more often if you usually leave Bluetooth off.
I suppose it might be worth stopping it monitoring when you're at home or it might think you're associating with your neighbours if your walls are transparent enough to radio waves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2020 11:47:08 GMT
I try to avoid the news most days now as it is just too depressing so had completely missed any announcement about this new app. I wonder how many others are in the same situation? I haven't seen it advertised anywhere.
|
|
