[G Griffin]

No one can really argue with that point. But they will.
There's a difference between 'go to work' and 'only go to work'.

It's like window cleaners know more about epidemiology than the scientists at the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies.

I'll just trust the science-led government advice.

Are you saying that they wouldn't say that the more people that stay at home would lead to a quicker eradication of the virus? Then say "stay home".
And don't forget, you're the one that said that window cleaners won't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus.
I wonder what the scientists would say about that.

[andyM]

Insurance companies will do ANYTHING to get out of paying up, so lets say someone has an accident cleaning windows, do you not think they will say you have not adhered to government advice and should have only gone to work  if you cannot work from home, and it is safe or essential ?

The same can be said driving to and from work if you had an accident, i would imagine they would ask where you travelling to work, when governmnet advice stated only if you have to and essential - I do not think for one minute they will believe it is essential.

You could therefore be classed an not insured - that was told to me by a HR Consultant.

So i would serously contact you insurers to ask will you be covered at the moment  once you have the answer please post on here.

Thanks

You're trying to come across as if you are speaking as fact, when in fact you are making things up as you go along.
And this "HR consultant" you speak of is a figment of your imagination, aren't they?
Go on admit it!   

[Missing Link]

Are you saying that they wouldn't say that the more people that stay at home would lead to a quicker eradication of the virus? Then say "stay home".

No, this is what I'm saying:

It's like window cleaners know more about epidemiology than the scientists at the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies.

I'll just trust the science-led government advice.

I can cut and paste it again for  you if you're still confused?

[Missing Link]

And don't forget, you're the one that said that window cleaners won't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus.
I wonder what the scientists would say about that.

They'd probably say window cleaners who follow the science-led guidelines won't make a blind bit of difference.

That's why scientists formulated the guidelines.

Science huh?

[G Griffin]

Are you saying that they wouldn't say that the more people that stay at home would lead to a quicker eradication of the virus? Then say "stay home".

No, this is what I'm saying:

It's like window cleaners know more about epidemiology than the scientists at the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies.

I'll just trust the science-led government advice.

I can cut and paste it again for  you if you're still confused?

You're making things up.
Are you disputing the point that I highlighted in the OP's post? I'm sure the scientists would back him up by asking more people to stay home.
Anyway, dispute away...….

[G Griffin]

And don't forget, you're the one that said that window cleaners won't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus.
I wonder what the scientists would say about that.

They'd probably say window cleaners who follow the science-led guidelines won't make a blind bit of difference.

That's why scientists formulated the guidelines.

Science huh?

I bet you that they wouldn't.

[Missing Link]

I bet you that they wouldn't.

Scientists created the guidelines, Griff.  If they thought window cleaners were a driver of covid-19, like school children can be, then they'd have shut us down.

Why do you deny science and think you know better?

[Missing Link]

I'm sure the scientists would back him up by asking more people to stay home.
Anyway, dispute away...….

No they wouldn't.

And what other hypothetical stuff would you like to say you're sure about?

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Just follow the science-led guidelines; scientists know what they're doing. 

Try not to out think them; you can't.

[G Griffin]

I bet you that they wouldn't.

Scientists created the guidelines, Griff.  If they thought window cleaners were a driver of covid-19, like school children can be, then they'd have shut us down.

Why do you deny science and think you know better?

I'm denying your 'science' because I do know better.
Why the frig are you talking about window cleaners and school children with regards to the coronavirus? They are not specified in the government guidelines.
Co-vid 19 doesn't discriminate and we're all potential carriers. Schools are shut down because of the numbers that attend. Window cleaners are not because we work in smaller numbers.
That was the OP's highlighted point.

[Missing Link]

I'm denying your 'science' because I do know better.

It's not my science; it's just science.

But if you know better than the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies then you really ought to do the UK a favour and let them know that their guidelines need changing.

Get Bungle to help you out with drafting your letter; he could add 'snipers' to your list of recommendations.

 

[G Griffin]

I'm denying your 'science' because I do know better.

It's not my science; it's just science.

But if you know better than the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies then you really ought to do the UK a favour and let them know that their guidelines need changing.

Get Archer to help you out with drafting your letter; he could add 'snipers' to your list of recommendations.

 

Why don't you tell them that you think that window cleaners don't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus?
Even though you think that your partner, a window cleaner, could have had it as far back as February.
I wonder if they'd accept that as science.
Do you think that they would?

[Missing Link]

Why don't you tell them that you think that window cleaners don't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus?
Even though you think that your partner, a window cleaner, could have had it as far back as February.
I wonder if they'd accept that as science.
Do you think that they would?

You're sounding a bit narky, Griff.

Is it time for a cup of tea?

What other science-led initiatives do you think you know more about than the scientists?

[G Griffin]

I'm denying your 'science' because I do know better.

It's not my science; it's just science.

But if you know better than the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies then you really ought to do the UK a favour and let them know that their guidelines need changing.

Get Bungle to help you out with drafting your letter; he could add 'snipers' to your list of recommendations.

 

Busby (Archer).
Is there anything else that I can help you with?

[Missing Link]

Is there anything else that I can help you with?

Yes, what other science-led policies do you think you know more about than the scientists?

[Missing Link]

Busby (Archer).

He's more like Bungle than Busby.

[G Griffin]

Why don't you tell them that you think that window cleaners don't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus?
Even though you think that your partner, a window cleaner, could have had it as far back as February.
I wonder if they'd accept that as science.
Do you think that they would?

You're sounding a bit narky, Griff.

Is it time for a cup of tea?

What other science-led initiatives do you think you know more about than the scientists?

You're not a scientist. Or scientists.

[JackieW]

I am absolutely shocked by the amount of people on here still going to work.
And some are going to be equally shocked that some aren't going to work.

I know it is personal choice but surely the chance of infecting one person is totally unnecessary.
It could  depend on how great that chance is.

Forget the safe 2 metre guidelines what about the vast amount of surfaces you will touch within a days work.
We all move furniture, plants ,open gates, touch doors etc during a days work meaning the potential is there to spread the virus to multiple gardens during a days work.
Yes I agree the potential is definitely there. If/when I decide to go back it is something to be aware of and I hope those that are still working  will too.

People are spending more and more time in there gardens during this self isolation period so with all the will in the world it is impossible to gaurantee the virus will not be passed on.
Yes I agree it is definitely possible for us to be spreading the virus  when we are cleaning peoples windows.

Ultimately who wants this on there conscience.
In an ideal world I doubt anyone  does.
 
If the government decide to stich us up on the 80% allowance then that is there bad and would be a massive betrayal to the millions of people doing the right thing and STAYING AT HOME and therefore having 0% of passing or contracting the virus.
Yes if the government try to back pedal on the grant it would be bad.

Do people not realise the more people that Stay at home the quicker this virus will be eradicated''
Yes I do.

''and everyone not just he selfish few can get back to rebuilding the country''
Not sure about that one.

God I’m bored beyond belief but any risk is a risk not worth taking it is after all just window cleaning.
That's the tricky one. Any risk?

That’s where the supermarket argument has absolutely no point in this argument as without food we die whereas I’ve never seen anybody die of dirty windows
I agree, I cannot see how the fact that people go shopping at supermarkets (essentials and as infrequently as possible  is the advice) has any bearing on justifying going window cleaning.

Please please please stay safe guys I know we all have bills to pay but if we save just one life you can not put a price on that.

[Missing Link]

Why don't you tell them that you think that window cleaners don't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus?
Even though you think that your partner, a window cleaner, could have had it as far back as February.
I wonder if they'd accept that as science.
Do you think that they would?

You're sounding a bit narky, Griff.

Is it time for a cup of tea?

What other science-led initiatives do you think you know more about than the scientists?

You're not a scientist. Or scientists.

Exactly; none of us are.

Which is why I'll follow the science-led government guidelines.

You however know better and think they're wrong.

Which other science-led policies do you disagree with?

[jk999]

I think in 36 years of cleaning windows i never touch any of those things you talk about

[G Griffin]

Why don't you tell them that you think that window cleaners don't make a blind bit of difference to the coronavirus?
Even though you think that your partner, a window cleaner, could have had it as far back as February.
I wonder if they'd accept that as science.
Do you think that they would?

You're sounding a bit narky, Griff.

Is it time for a cup of tea?

What other science-led initiatives do you think you know more about than the scientists?

You're not a scientist. Or scientists.

Exactly; none of us are.

Which is why I'll follow the science-led government guidelines.

You however know better and think they're wrong.

Which other science-led policies do you disagree with?

I didn't say anyone, let alone a scientist, was wrong.
I said I don't think anyone could argue with the OP's highlighted point. You are though by saying that the scientists disagree with it. Have you any back up for this?
Do you not think the point of the lockdown is to prevent the spread of the virus?
The scientists do.