It's not a new phenomena [1]. I do not think "hospitals are incapable of keeping people safe from Covid" is the best expression. I think "encountering any humans bears increased risk in Covid times", regardless if those humans work in a hospital (although, arguably lower risk) versus a shoe store.
It calls into question the effectiveness of all the Covid countermeasures. A triple vaxxed person, following all masking and distancing requirements, in a highly controlled environment still gets Covid. It makes you feel a bit like... What's the point? Do we realistically have any tools that slow the spread of Omicron?
The standard response is "Just imagine how bad it would be without all the restrictions!". Which is exactly the problem, perhaps. You're using imagination and not a quantitative approach. You can say that about literally anything. "Just imagine how much worse we would have lost that game if I wasn't wearing my lucky socks!"
A) Covid is probably airborne and refusal to admit as such and this upgrade hvac is potentially an ignored reality
B) why aren’t we testing and segregated people in hospitals? If society is expected to segregate unvaccinated people why can’t hospitals test and segregate healthy patients from anyone with Covid?
C) what expression is appropriate for a hospital that was incapable of preventing a patient free of Covid from contracting Covid in the hospital? Unwilling perhaps? Uninterested?
Yes, your employment contract has likely a minimum number of hours of work stipulated (otherwise PTO etc becomes hard).
Look, i’m not saying it is a valuable way of looking at productivity at all, but the fraud aspect is reasonably clear.
So if it states 40 hours, you put in 40 hours. If you do nothing during those 40 hours, we can have a moral/ethics discussion about if and how you should change the situation etc, but at that point we’re outside of the fraud scenario in my opinion.
At will salaried (non-hourly) exempt employment contracts in the US do not generally state the number of hours you must work in a day or week (mine does not). And even if they do, how do you measure "working" hours? Are you committing fraud if you sit in the office and browse the internet for an hour every day? And how does that translate to working from home?
I will say from experience that someone who does 10 hours of good, productive work a week is still adding more value to the company than someone who works 80 but writes terrible code, ships bugs and causes outages. If you want to accuse someone of fraud for not being valuable, go after the latter.
In that case, paxys, I stand corrected and can see where the questions in this thread are coming from, indeed.
In my experience in Europe, an employment contract will state number of hours (say 36, 40, etc) and you need to be present and available for that time. These are non-hourly contracts (e.g. salary is expressed by month not hour). None of that has anything to do with productivity, to your/mine point.
The wording is slightly negative, but it does describe that side of the role well.
There are also positive aspects that hang in the balance. Personally (as a people manager) I appreciated the positive impact (coaching, career development) I could make to people around me in ways that are not easily replicated in other roles. And there are many others.
