I am not a parent. Never had kids. But these ever-changing COVID briefing times are giving me insight into how common work practices adversely affect parents, especially women parents. /thread
Although not a parent, my life is arranged in such a way that I do often have child care duties. I love this! It's good stuff, makes my life richer. Best of all: I get to the send the child home after a while, and so my responsibility is limited.
So, tomorrow I have child care duties at 3:15. And the briefing is scheduled for 1pm. No problem! I'll go to One Government for 1pm, it'll be over by 2 or so, and I'll take the bus and be home in plenty of time. Except....
Well, often the scheduled 1pm meetings are pushed back to 2pm, and sometimes to 3pm. Typically, the postponements aren't announced until 12 or 12:30. 2pm, I can probably make my child care appointment, but no way for 3pm.
I want to be at the meeting personally as opposed to assigning it, for a variety of reasons — I've been following the covid testing, numbers, etc, more than the other writers (who follow other stuff better than me), etc. But I could assign it.
But I see that many parents would be in this position: I could NOT DO THIS PROFESSIONAL THING that is a core part of my job, because I have to tend to child care, or I could risk attending, only to go AWOL at the last moment.
Both situations, obviously, would be detrimental to the parent's career.
It's the uncertainty of the timing that is the problem. If I knew for sure that the briefing was going to start at 3, I'd either assign it to someone else or find someone to do the child care. But by leaving it to the last moment, I don't have either option.
Not that big of a deal for me personally! But it gives me a tiny bit of insight into how workplace practices can serve to punish parents.
Needlessly, I should add. If they just picked a damn time and stuck with, people could make life plans around the time. But a bunch of bureaucrats, especially those who have a spouse at home dedicated to child care, really don't think about such things.
Anyway, just thought I'd mention it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@ArticulateDinos@picardonhealth@NSNDP@globalnews@kat_toth And debates about policy are healthy. The government and Strang *should* be challenged, and have to defend their policies. That's what democracy is all about. We have far too much paternalism in Canadian government 2/
Here it is ... a new whack of potential COVID exposures, it 2 parts...
If you've been at these locations, if you have symptoms, you must self-isolate, but if you don't have symptoms, you don't. Either way, you do need to get tested:
And if you were at these locations you need to self-isolate regardless of whether you have symptoms, until you get a negative test:
The 10 new cases today fall into the following demographics:
• 6 aged 20-39 (three women and three men)
• 2 aged 40-59 (both are men)
• 2 aged 60-79 (one woman and one man)
Here is the graph of daily new cases and the 7-day rolling average (today at 2.4):
And here is the active caseload, heading the wrong direction but still much lower than in the December outbreak:
Today's COVID briefing, scheduled to start at 1pm, is delayed about 15 minutes, I'm told, so the daily cased update can be completed first.
There are 10 new cases of COVID-19 announced in Nova Scotia today (Tuesday, Feb. 26) 1/
9 of the new cases are in the Central Zone — 5 of those are close contacts of previously announced cases, 3 are under investigation, and 1 is related to travel outside Atlantic Canada 2/
3 new cases of COVID-19 are announced in Nova Scotia today (Wednesday, Feb. 24) 1/
All 3 cases are in Nova Scotia Health's Central Zone. 1 is a close contact of a previously announced case. The other 2 are "under investigation," which typically means we are never again told abut them. 2/
There are now 21 known active cases of the disease in the province. 1 person remains in hospital with the disease, in ICU 3/