Arb Assoc now saying we can go back to work

[Andymacp]

Similarly, respectfully, I’d suggest the main question, as per thread title, is the interpretation by many of the stance and guidance being presented by AA on the individuals’ decision making as regards work / not to work. 
 
Whilst AA advice appears to have swung, first one way, then the other, it still appears to retain an element of qualification (essential / non essential) which, can only be assumed to be, some form of organisational interpretation of very clear published government guidance and which, doubtless, has contributed to a widespread industry close down which is counter to government guidance. 
 
Agreed, how to work more safely is a useful approach. 
 
A clear and unequivocal acknowledgement of the “go to work if you absolutely can not work from home” would have been a better starting point perhaps. 

The Arb association are a trade body not gov level. They can take any stance or opinion they like and you can choose to follow or ignore as you please.

I agree there has been a lot of confusion from them which hasn’t helped. But if they say you should only work with a fish in your mouth it doesn’t make it law or we have to follow it, it is simply the opinion of an independent business.

You cannot simply say “if you can’t work from home you should work “
It needs to be referenced with the rest of the guidance that you can but only if you can follow the PHE guidelines and also your responsibility as an employer to ensure the safety of your staff.

[otter]

Dosent matter what any one says.. I AIN'T GOT NO WORK. 

My phone has not rang for 3 weeks 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

1 hour ago, Andymacp said:

 

 

(1) The Arb association are a trade body not gov level. (2) They can take any stance or opinion they like and you can choose to follow or ignore as you please.

(3) I agree there has been a lot of confusion from them which hasn’t helped. (4) But if they say you should only work with a fish in your mouth it doesn’t make it law or we have to follow it, it is simply the opinion of an independent business.

(5) You cannot simply say “if you can’t work from home you should work “
It needs to be referenced with the rest of the guidance that you can but only (6) if you can follow the PHE guidelines and also your responsibility as an employer to ensure the safety of your staff.

 

 

I've rather struggled to understand and form a response to this post.

 

The first point is a statement of the blindingly obvious.

 

The second is a little bit more complex.  As a registered charity and a limited company the AA are bound by certain laws, responsibilities and by their own constitution so it is not quite as simple as saying they can take any stance they like.  It is entirely appropriate however for any entity to take, or leave, any advice or guidance provided by the AA - unless those entities are bound by membership to adopt and abide by such guidance.

 

Herein lies a part of the problem.  If an entity is associated by membership with the AA, they may be bound by their terms & conditions to abide by AA guidance on penalty of exclusion.  It is, of course, an entirely voluntary membership.

 

But it has more far reaching effect across the broader non affiliated profession since the AA presents itself as an independent voice, free to influence decision makers and challenge actions and policy and it DOES hold a position of influence within the industry.

 

I have no doubt that much good work is achieved - my personal view is, however, that the position adopted with regard to C19 has, and remains, inconsistent with clearly stated government guidance.  

 

The third point, I guess it would be possible to agree that the 'confusion' has not been exclusive to this sector and as such, some leeway is appropriate.

 

Point 4, brilliant, loving the fish example!  But more seriously (and linking back to your previous post about 2 rope working) I have to agree, when something is obviously ridiculous, it gets ignored.  If we combine the 2 rope issue and this issue (in such close succession) it doesn't provide as strong a case for new membership as might be hoped...

 

Point 5, Again, agreed, I don't think it has ever been suggested as being simple.  The guidance is simple, the implementation less so - but still entirely achievable.  I certainly haven't (intentionally) suggested it is simple or business as usual in the points I've presented.  I'm guessing most people are still taking the mail delivered to their house and opening it?  I think it is a good deal easier to find reasons not to carry on working than it is to find means of doing so.

 

And finally, 6, I think the joint HSE, TUC, CBI statement makes quite clear that business should be encouraged to continue where PHE guidelines can be achieved.  They certainly didn't make any reference to essential / non essential works, neither has any official government statement that I've seen to date.  

 

These types of localised 'interpretations' of government statements are being made by, and reported in the media, by lower tier organisations and they are inappropriate.

 

IMHO

 

(removes fish from mouth to drink wine) 

 

 

 

 

[slasherscot]

the reason to not work is simple to me........u cant stop cross contamination to either one of your staff or yourself..  u could pick it up from a gatepost, side of a tree whatever, the virus can live for up to 72hrs, and u could pass it onto the next job u go to....or onto your workmates or take home with you to your family.

 

We are on call for emergency tree work for a client.......which we will do if necessary.....but it will only if its dangerous to the public at large.

 

Keep safe guys...

[ChunksBigBro]

7 minutes ago, slasherscot said:

the reason to not work is simple to me........u cant stop cross contamination to either one of your staff or yourself..  u could pick it up from a gatepost, side of a tree whatever, the virus can live for up to 72hrs, and u could pass it onto the next job u go to....or onto your workmates or take home with you to your family.

 

We are on call for emergency tree work for a client.......which we will do if necessary.....but it will only if its dangerous to the public at large.

 

Keep safe guys...

These facts are all bang on the money and true. They are a concern of mine, and i think should be everyones BUT the virus is here now ( 1 month in) so lets not work and be safe, fair point! But it will still be here in 3-6 months time, will your concerns still stop you working then? If ud be willing to go back in 3-6 months , why not go back now? Or may be more under control, but some fucker will still cough n open a door handle / gate post / delivery

Edited April 7, 2020 by ChunksBigBro

[Ian C]

I Furloughed my guys 2 weeks ago and have shut down until further notice, both myself and one of my employees are married to front line NHS staff so that pretty much answers the question of should I work with others! For one man bands of family workers I think its not as bad but having employees is a different ball game, Remember the H&S at work act? I don't know it word for word but its there to protect workers and how can I do that in this situation. on top of that the phone is quite, Domestics are saving there money and some don't want contractors on there property at this time, there is the social stigma as well, a local firm to me got grief last week on a domestic job with people filming them, sometimes you just have to accept it and think of the bigger picture!

 

I think the AA have been well off the mark with crap advice recently, I would take advice from the Government not a trade body with no clought.