COVID-19 2020 HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL SEASON

[District12AA]

2 hours ago, ecu said:

MLB is getting ready to cause the cancellation of football at all levels! The NBA shut down all spring sports so look for same in fall.

Nope. Manfred did an interview tonight, you should watch it.

[BarneySox2007]

6 hours ago, ecu said:

MLB is getting ready to cause the cancellation of football at all levels! The NBA shut down all spring sports so look for same in fall.

Considering their playing in front of Corrugated cutouts of fans in the stands and still have an outbreak really sheds light on a lot of things. Like I've said to many moving pieces and parts and MLB has the money to monitor this situation better than a high school football program. 

[Djohnson]

20 hours ago, Djohnson said:

I just said move to spring in hopes of playing this school year for the seniors. But if you see all the rules and how high school kids are getting the virus. How can you have fans and parents wear a mask social distance no concessions  Limited number of fans. Then say let a group of 100+boys play on Friday nights. Just guessing that it’s 10,0000 + in the whole state playing and spreading it. But you make them stay away from each other during school. But when school is over play on.  It’s crazy to me that if they are social distancing during school they should do it at school functions not let kids from all over different counties play each other. To me that is how you spread it. They are lucky that they even are starting school up. Let’s not do stupid stuff to make them shut schools down because of outbreaks.

 

[HTV]

It's telling that many of the national talking heads are disappointed that MLB didn't pull the plug yesterday.  So much of the national media want misery, not anything moving forward.  

MLB set up their roster system differently for this season and to be prepared for situations like this.  Since there is no minor league baseball this year, MLB set up a "60 man roster" for teams to choose 30 for the active roster.  The other 30 are working out daily doing intrasquad games to be ready if they are moved to the active roster.  And unlike normal years, there is free movement of those players, meaning that there are no optioning requirements or worries of numbers of options a player has left, no wavier requirements, and no limitations on whether a called up player has to be added to the 40 man roster if he's not already there.  This possibility was anticipated and planned for.  

[tradertwo]

10 hours ago, osunut2 said:

I'm certainly no law expert, but if that's true, my employer is going to have a sh%t-load of lawsuits. Same for a lot of other businesses who can provide an alternative work option for high risk employees.

You have been discussing what-if's and we should's... I've been countering with established guidelines and practices. Here's a what-if... what if your employer provides an alternative work option for a few of your co-workers (let's say age), yet you are not exempted from your normal duties because you aren't deemed "high risk"? What if your normal duties cause you to contract CV-19, take it home to a family member, and that family member perishes from it? Your employer's own policy has already determined that you were placed in a more perilous position than some of your peers, selected only by their discriminatory conditions for exemption.

  I'm no law expert either, but your employer's own well intended policy has basically acknowledged that there was a disparity in risk, and admitted that they were aware that you were placed at heightened risk, determined only because of your age. 

[osunut2]

51 minutes ago, tradertwo said:

I'm no law expert either, but your employer's own well intended policy has basically acknowledged that there was a disparity in risk, and admitted that they were aware that you were placed at heightened risk, determined only because of your age. 

I obviously don't have the right answers here, but I don't fault my employer, or any employer, for trying to protect their most vulnerable employees. How is that any different from our society trying to protect the most vulnerable individuals during the past 4-5 months? Isn't that better than just rolling the dice and letting the chips fall where they may?

I get that I'm debating hypotheticals, but there is a clear disparity in risk here, and I think you have to draw a line somewhere. Discriminatory or not, employers shouldn't just roll the dice and treat everyone equally in an unprecedented situation like this (regardless of age/general health/pre-existing conditions). Maybe they're danged if they do, and danged if they don't. Either way, I don't think an employer should be faulted for making an effort to protect their most vulnerable employees, if they have the means.

Edited July 28, 2020 by osunut2

[tradertwo]

On 7/25/2020 at 7:06 PM, osunut2 said:

...the taxpayers will pay the price if something does happen. There are teachers who are considered high risk (due to age, pre-existing conditions, etc) who are being told to teach in person or else.

 

24 minutes ago, osunut2 said:

I obviously don't have the right answers here, but I don't fault my employer, or any employer, for trying to protect their most vulnerable employees.

I'm not trying to be heartless... I completely agree with the sentiment of all your posts, but legally (especially in a government funded occupation), you simply cannot discriminate for any reason what is expected of an employee, nor the environment in which they work. You began the discussion by implying that school systems would be liable if they did not discriminate, when the exact opposite is true according to law.

 

[osunut2]

1 hour ago, tradertwo said:

 

I'm not trying to be heartless... I completely agree with the sentiment of all your posts, but legally (especially in a government funded occupation), you simply cannot discriminate for any reason what is expected of an employee, nor the environment in which they work. You began the discussion by implying that school systems would be liable if they did not discriminate, when the exact opposite is true according to law.

 

I guess we'll see which way the wind blows. In the past 4 months, that discrimination that you describe has happened company-wide where I'm employed (specifically based on age and pre-existing health conditions), as well as other companies that I'm connected to.

The ongoing Amazon Warehouse lawsuit will likely lay the groundwork for future lawsuits of its kind, depending on how the court rules.

[tradertwo]

48 minutes ago, osunut2 said:

I guess we'll see which way the wind blows. In the past 4 months, that discrimination that you describe has happened company-wide where I'm employed (specifically based on age and pre-existing health conditions), as well as other companies that I'm connected to.

The ongoing Amazon Warehouse lawsuit will likely lay the groundwork for future lawsuits of its kind, depending on how the court rules.

The court will rule according to the law unless gross negligence is proven, at least until the law is changed... that's what the court system is for. Your analogy of your company is irrelevant in this discussion, until someone files a lawsuit for negligence or discrimination. No need to reply... I'm done beating this dead  horse, as I can see that your opinion isn't going to change and your argument is based only on your opinion. Sorry that I have to appear heartless and argumentative in this discussion, but that's my viewpoint based upon the laws regulating school employees and working conditions.

[Mavericksinflight]

We do not have a company, organization etc..without employees. The employee is the backbone. In best interest of an entity would be to protect those that keep you afloat. Especially in this pandemic those most vulnerable. And should include out football players

[Joyful95]

22 hours ago, Romansfive8 said:

What if the 5 different studies/test from 2015,16,17,18,19 & April 2020 showed wearing clothMsk put the individual wearing it at more risk/more susceptible of getting a large particle non smelling v, would it then still  be better to wear than nothing, plus if the individual wearing it is more at risk, then what about those that have been around that individual??  

Does clothmsk possibly jeopardize oxygen levels or breathing or cause the mask to become moist from your breath and attract more particles??

What does OSHA.gov say about wearing  respiratory msk and oxygen below 19.5% of the recommended level??

Looking forward to your feedback.

Thank You 

 

 

Apologies in advance! I tried to send a direct message or private message but was unable to due to being on my phone.

I am sorry but I was unable to find the mask studies from 2015-2020 that you were were referring to. I did find information that states that specific mask types may not be healthy for specific conditions but none of which stated that that wearing a mask made an individual more susceptible to coming in contact with respiratory droplets. I am not saying that those studies do not exist but I was unable to find them.

There are cases of people wearing N95 type mask for prolonged periods of time affecting oxygen levels but not enough to lead to hypoxia or hypercapnia. Cloth mask allow almost of the co2 to escape. It is possible that a person with COPD or asthma could be affected depending on the severity of their condition and the total time the mask was worn.

I could also not find any study that suggested to mask capturing respiratory droplets place the wearer or those around them at a higher risk. Most medical professionals do suggest washing cloth mask after wearing them each day.

OSHA does require that employers keep their workplace at 19.5% oxygen or higher. Anything lower that 19.5% is considered to be oxygen deficient. If you are referencing the Jeff Neff video from late June I would respectfully point out that the manufacturer of the Altair 5X Multi Gas detector have gone on record as say saying that their device was not used in the correct manner and that is why the oxygenation levels were below 19.5%. I would also respectfully submit that in July OSHA stated that they generally recommend that employers encourage mask in the workplace.

While we may disagree I value and respect your opinion and mean no disrespect to you as an individual.

I know I have posted about mask in a football forum and I apologize. I beg forgiveness for this transgression and promise to henceforth only post on noncontroversial topics such as how Maryville and Alcoa cheat, how private schools recruit and how West Tennessee is more dominant in football than is East Tennessee.

Have a great day!

Edited July 29, 2020 by Joyful95

[RocketHouse]

https://www.jacksonsun.com/story/sports/high-school/2020/07/28/gov-lee-signs-order-allow-contact-sports-high-schools/5531248002/

 

Play Ball!