Public health experts and those in government have had to make difficult and complex decisions to try and get the right balance between total lockdown to stop the virus from spreading uncontrollably and economic activity to guarantee livelihoods.
As the infection rate seems to be dropping across most of the northern hemisphere, we are now in one of the most challenging stages of the pandemic, as it is much harder to get the pace and shape of the end of the lockdown right when compared to the lockdown itself.
The Government’s decision to bring forward Phase 2 of its reopening plans by one week was a welcome move, coupled with the good news that we have been without new COVID-19 fatalities for a while now.
Elsewhere in the world, a relaxation of lockdown rules is also happening, even where death rates have been particularly bad. In Britain, the government announced that more shops in England will be allowed to open with, more controversially, schools also expected to gradually open their gates (rules are different for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). Italy continues to reopen, with tight controls, and Spain has allowed its citizens back on the beaches and is to reopen the country to holidaymakers soon (tourism represents over 15 per cent of its GDP).
Although public health must remain the priority, we could have moved faster –and still can–if a more sophisticated risk-based assessment for each business and each activity is developed.
From a messaging point of view, there is some logic in the ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, when the whole manufacturing sector, for instance, is lumped together as one. After all, simple messages are easier to follow. But what the pandemic has shown us is that–with a few exceptions–individuals have been more than capable of understanding and willing to act properly to protect themselves and their fellow citizens even when dealing with complex situations.
Unsurprisingly, by being treated as responsible citizens, most behaved like responsible citizens. And they can do so again, even with more nuanced messages.
Every business, every employer–in the state or private sector–understands the concept of risk assessments. They have to, as it is a requirement under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
Under OSHA rules, employers must complete assessments to identify and mitigate against risks posed to both their employers and those who may interact with the business, such as visitors or contractors.
A proper set of risk assessment criteria, if implemented properly, is considerably more effective than blanket sector decisions. After all, shops, factories, restaurants and even tourist spots come in all shapes, types and sizes.
The risks and actions required to mitigate against infection in a small or large shop will be different, just as each factory production line is different.
Good risk assessments are done with the engagement of the workforce, so that the required actions are understood. And, for where trade unions are recognised, they are even more powerful if the work is done in a true partnership between managers and labour leaders.
One way to speed up the reopening process is to require that specific coronavirus risk assessments form the basis of a declaration each business should be required to make, confirming they identified the risks and have taken the steps necessary to help control the infection and protect the workforce.
For this to be effective, businesses must:
*Identify the activity or situations that could allow for the transmission of the virus;
*Consider those who might be at risk (and what can be done to mitigate against that);
*Decide the likelihood and how those at risk could be exposed to the virus;
*Take the necessary steps to either eliminate the risk or, if not possible, to control the risk through new procedures, additional protective equipment, etc.
If we consistently and comprehensively apply this approach, not all activities will be good to go. Practising the adequate levels of social distancing for both workers and customers in small restaurants, for instance, may be either impossible or financially unviable. But a higher number of businesses–large and small–should be able to operate without compromising the gains we have made so far.
And, naturally, should something go wrong, localised and highly targeted breaks can be applied to stop the virus from spreading more widely again.
South Korea seems to be leading the way in dealing with this pandemic and its latest targeted closures following a recent jump in cases confirms what many specialists believe may well be the world’s reality until an effective vaccine is found: we will have to learn to live and deal with infection spikes.
For their part, businesses must commit to tightly enforce agreed procedures, supported by all workers and, if applicable, their trade union representatives. Even in normal times, health and safety should never be left to be just part of cheap union point-scoring; during a pandemic, doing so would be criminal.
An honest, constructive and positive partnership between managers, staff and trade unions is the only way for us to make sure the risk of infection is considerably reduced, with as many as possible staying healthy and sustaining their livelihoods.
If we fail to do this–and now, what has been a public health crisis with the economy shored up by the Government risks becoming a social and economic crisis, sinking business and jobs along the way.
And a socio-economic crisis is the last thing we need in our country.
The criminal underworld sent an unequivocal message that it is back in business, summarily executing four people in New Grant last weekend.
This same underworld will no doubt love to continue seeing big numbers of people sitting idle at home or, worse, unemployed–a perfect opportunity to co-opt more to swell their ranks, especially young men.
Hardly what the doctor ordered as we recover from one of the most traumatic moments in a generation.
